From: | Paul A Jungwirth <pj(at)illuminatedcomputing(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: docs about FKs referencing partitioned tables |
Date: | 2019-05-29 05:01:35 |
Message-ID: | CA+renyWhTKaoOT+5bekN+NO-v-idv4NpGHEncnn7Ke7CgKPOBQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 7:49 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> Well, the point I would like to outline is that section 5.11.2 about
> declarative partitioning and 5.11.3 about partitioning with
> inheritance treat about two separate, independent partitioning
> methods. So removing the paragraph from the declarative partitioning
> section mentioning foreign keys referencing partitioned tables is
> fine, because that's not the case anymore...
> [snip]
> ... However you are adding a paragraph for something which is
> completely unrelated to the issue we are trying to fix. If I were to
> add something, I think that I would be more general than what you are
> trying here and just mention a link to the previous paragraph about
> the caveats of inheritance as they apply to single table members of an
> inheritance tree and not a full set:
> "Indexes and foreign key constraint apply to single tables and not
> their inheritance children, hence they have some <link>caveats</> to
> be aware of."
That seems reasonable to me. Here is a patch file if that is helpful
(minor typo corrected).
Yours,
Paul
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
inheritance_fk_docs_v0003.patch | application/octet-stream | 1.3 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Langote | 2019-05-29 05:33:26 | Re: docs about FKs referencing partitioned tables |
Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2019-05-29 04:26:19 | Re: How to know referenced sub-fields of a composite type? |