Re: Partitioned tables and [un]loggedness

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Partitioned tables and [un]loggedness
Date: 2024-09-19 19:45:04
Message-ID: Zux_QODFzijk93Pr@nathan
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 10:03:09AM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> It looks to me like these cases could be modified to accept only
> ATT_PARTITIONED_TABLE, not ATT_TABLE anymore. The ATT_TABLE cases are
> useless anyway, because they're rejected by transformPartitionCmd.

+1. If anything, this makes the error messages more consistent.

--
nathan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Noah Misch 2024-09-19 21:33:46 Re: race condition in pg_class
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2024-09-19 19:22:46 Re: Adding skip scan (including MDAM style range skip scan) to nbtree