| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [SPAM] Re: Local partitioned indexes and pageinspect |
| Date: | 2018-05-02 06:14:52 |
| Message-ID: | 20180502061452.GA1723@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 01:38:22PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> Perhaps, I'm just repeating what's already been said, but I think it might
> be better to have the word "partitioned" in the message.
That's what Peter is pointing to upthread and what the v1 of upthread
was doing. I would tend to think to just keep the code simple and don't
add those extra checks, but I am fine to be beaten as well.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Langote | 2018-05-02 06:26:58 | Re: Remove mention in docs that foreign keys on partitioned tables are not supported |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2018-05-02 05:41:32 | Re: A few warnings on Windows |