Re: [HACKERS] multi-column range partition constraint

On 2017/05/14 1:07, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 12:42 AM, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Attached is the correct version.
> 
> Thank you!  I committed 0001 with a couple of cosmetic tweaks and with
> the change I previously suggested around partexprs_item.  You argued
> that wouldn't work because the contents of partexprs_item was
> modified, but that's not so: partexprs_item in
> get_range_key_properties is a pointer the partexprs_item in the
> caller.  When it modifies *partexprs_item, it's not changing the
> contents of the ListCell itself, just the caller's ListCell *.

I see.

> I also ran pgindent over the patch.

Oops, had forgotten about pgindent.

> Also committed 0002.  In that case, I removed CHECK (...) from the
> output; the caller can always add that if it's desired, but since a
> partitioning constraint is NOT a CHECK constraint I don't actually
> think it's useful in most cases.  I also tweaked the regression tests
> slightly.

Thanks for reviewing and committing.  Agree about not including CHECK ().

Regards,
Amit