| From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: sketchy partcollation handling |
| Date: | 2017-06-07 00:30:46 |
| Message-ID: | 84ab38f9-3807-4d56-ee9e-1e7576e73952@lab.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017/06/07 0:19, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Amit Langote
> <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>> I think we can call it a bug of StorePartitionKey(). I looked at the
>> similar code in index_create() (which actually I had originally looked at
>> for reference when writing the partitioning code in question) and looks
>> like it doesn't store the dependency for collation 0 and for the default
>> collation of the database. I think the partitioning code should do the
>> same. Attached find a patch for the same (which also updates the
>> documentation as mentioned above); with the patch:
>
> Thanks. Committed.
Thank you.
Regards,
Amit
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joe Conway | 2017-06-07 00:52:50 | Re: BUG #14682: row level security not work with partitioned table |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2017-06-07 00:30:14 | Re: sketchy partcollation handling |