Re: [HACKERS] PG10 partitioning - odd behavior/possible bug

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PG10 partitioning - odd behavior/possible bug
Date: 2017-11-29 00:25:04
Message-ID: CA+TgmobXEEjpoJ8jDy5Z0UmpzOPF9hQLNDMB72hRX3BfSe7opg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 6:42 PM, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> wrote:
> Yeah, Tom already pointed that out a while back:
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20986.1504478066%40sss.pgh.pa.us

Ah, sorry, hadn't seen that.

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2017-11-29 00:38:31 Re: default range partition and constraint exclusion
Previous Message Joe Conway 2017-11-28 23:42:54 Re: [HACKERS] PG10 partitioning - odd behavior/possible bug