Re: dropping partitioned tables without CASCADE

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 1:42 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> Amit Langote wrote:
>> On 2017/09/06 19:14, Amit Langote wrote:
>> > On 2017/09/06 18:46, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
>> >> Okay, I have marked this as ready for committer.
>> >
>> > Thanks Ashutosh and Rushabh for rebasing and improving the patch. Looks
>> > good to me too.
>>
>> Patch needed to be rebased after the default partitions patch went in, so
>> done. Per build status on http://commitfest.cputube.org :)
>
> I think adding "is partitioned" at end of line isn't good; looks like a
> phrase but isn't translatable. Maybe add keyword PARTITIONED instead?

In that case may be we should separate bounds and "PARTITIONED" with a
",". "part_default DEFAULT, PARTITIONED" would read better than
"part_default DEFAULT PARTITIONED"?

>
> Having the DEFAULT partition show up in the middle of the list is weird.

Agreed. But that's true even without this patch.

> Is it possible to put it at either start or end of the list?
>

Right now, we could do that if we order the list by bound expression;
lexically DEFAULT would come before FOR VALUES ... . But that's not
future-safe; we may have a bound expression starting with A, B or C.
Beyond that it really gets tricky to order the partitions by bounds.

The goal of this patch is to mark the partitioned partitions as such
and show the number of partitions. While your suggestion is a valid
request, it's kind of beyond the scope of this patch. Someone might
want to extend this request and say that partitions should be listed
in the order of their bounds (I do feel that we should do some effort
in that direction). But I am not sure whether it should be done in
this patch.

--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company