| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: no default hash partition |
| Date: | 2019-08-07 21:22:01 |
| Message-ID: | 21893.1565212921@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2019-Aug-07, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hm, that's rather confusingly worded IMO. Is the antecedent of "this
>> option" just DEFAULT, or does it mean that you can't use FOR VALUES,
>> or perchance it means that you can't use a PARTITION OF clause
>> at all?
> Uh, you're right, I hadn't noticed that. Not my text. I think this can
> be fixed easily as in the attached. There are other options, but I like
> this one the best.
OK, but maybe also s/created as a default partition/created as the default
partition/ ? Writing "a" carries the pretty clear implication that there
can be more than one, and contradicting that a sentence later doesn't
improve it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2019-08-07 21:31:45 | Re: Documentation clarification re: ANALYZE |
| Previous Message | Isaac Morland | 2019-08-07 21:14:04 | Documentation clarification re: ANALYZE |