Re: Declarative partitioning - another take

Amit,

* Amit Langote (Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote:
> Hmm, I had mixed feeling about what to do about that as well.  So now, we
> have the description of various new features buried into VI. Reference
> section of the documentation, which is simply meant as a command
> reference.  I agree that the new partitioning warrants more expansion in
> the DDL partitioning chapter.  Will see how that could be done.

Definitely.

> > * The fact that there's no implementation of row movement should be
> > documented as a limitation.  We should also look at removing that
> > limitation.
>
> Yes, something to improve.  By the way, since we currently mention INSERT
> tuple-routing directly in the description of the partitioned tables in the
> CREATE TABLE command reference, is that also the place to list this
> particular limitation?  Or is UPDATE command reference rather the correct
> place?

Both.

Thanks!

Stephen