From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Partitioned tables and relfilenode |
Date: | 2017-02-19 20:31:40 |
Message-ID: | CANP8+jLSzdcmqHS-EV41caqZPZC4VwWZ=hxorKj9sLj+MOibzw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 16 February 2017 at 11:32, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 10 February 2017 at 06:19, Amit Langote
> <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>
>> the "right thing" here being that the
>> command's code either throws an error or warning (in some cases) if the
>> specified table is a partitioned table or ignores any partitioned tables
>> when it reads the list of relations to process from pg_class.
>
> This is a massive assumption and deserves major discussion.
>
> My expectation is that "partitioned tables" are "tables". Anything
> else seems to fly in the face of both the SQL Standard and the POLA
> principle for users coming from other database systems.
>
> IMHO all the main actions should all "just work" not throw errors.
This included DROP TABLE, which I commented on before.
CASCADE should not be required.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2017-02-19 20:39:30 | Re: Documentation improvements for partitioning |
Previous Message | Devrim Gündüz | 2017-02-19 20:10:29 | Re: drop support for Python 2.3 |