Re: [HACKERS] Hash Functions

On 2017-05-14 18:25:08 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> It may well be that we can get away with saying "we're not going
> to make it simple to move hash-partitioned tables with float
> partition keys between architectures with different float
> representations".  But there's a whole lot of daylight between that
> and denying any support for float representations other than the
> currently-most-popular one.

Note that I, IIRC in the mail you responded to, also argued that I don't
think it'd be a good idea to rely on hashfunctions being portable.  The
amount of lock-in that'd create, especially for more complex datatypes,
seems wholly inadvisable.  I still think that dumping tables in a way
they're reloaded via the top-partition (probably one copy statement for
each child partition), and prohibiting incoming fkeys to partitions, is
a better approach to all this.

Greetings,

Andres Freund