Re: On partitioning

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: On partitioning
Date: 2014-12-15 18:55:01
Message-ID: CA+TgmoaA18DL8SG51tDQ=wjQBAqb658cR1TSV3diLmk_x9iRzQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 9:12 PM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> This means if a user puts arbitrary expressions in a partition definition, say,
>
> ... FOR VALUES extract(month from current_date) TO extract(month from current_date + interval '3 months'),
>
> we make sure that those expressions are pre-computed to literal values.

I would expect that to fail, just as it would fail if you tried to
build an index using a volatile expression.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Janes 2014-12-15 18:55:30 Re: pgbench -f and vacuum
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2014-12-15 18:54:34 Logical Decoding follows timelines