| From: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Mention ordered datums in PartitionBoundInfoData comment |
| Date: | 2017-12-05 04:48:43 |
| Message-ID: | CAFjFpReBR3ftK9C23LLCZY_TDXhhjB_dgE-L9+mfTnA=gkvdvQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
Julien Rouhaund, who has proposed a patch for partition-wise ordering
mentioned to me offlist that the comments for PartitionBoundInfoData
do not mention the fact that the datums in datums array are ordered. I
think that's important to mention there. So here's patch to do that.
The comment I have added refers to the functions which order the
datums, since every partition kind has different method of ordering
datums and I think the prologue is not a suitable place to explain
that ordering. I have added a sentence for range and list partitioning
since the ordering is easier to explain in those cases. Also added a
sentence about canonical PartitionBoundInfoData without using that
word.
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| pbid_ordering_comment.patch | text/x-patch | 1.3 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2017-12-05 05:01:27 | Re: Is it OK to ignore directory open failure in ResetUnloggedRelations? |
| Previous Message | David Steele | 2017-12-05 04:37:09 | Re: Is it OK to ignore directory open failure in ResetUnloggedRelations? |