Re: Should new partitions inherit their tablespace from their parent?
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Should new partitions inherit their tablespace from their parent? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoYn66t0PL=s6Zz6fAh2GewBLk7N5E1oskG+6H4hSHSahQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Should new partitions inherit their tablespace from their parent? (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: Should new partitions inherit their tablespace from their parent?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 9:43 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 12:50:40PM +1300, David Rowley wrote: > > How about we record the tablespace option for the partitioned table in > > reltablespace instead of saving it as 0. Newly created partitions > > which don't have a TABLESPACE mentioned in the CREATE TABLE command > > should be created in their direct parent partitioned tables > > tablespace. > > I have seen enough complains on the mailing lists regarding the way > tablespaces are handled for partitioned tables and their partitions that > it looks like a very good idea to make the tablespace being inherited > automatically, by setting up reltablespace to a non-zero value even if > a partitioned table has no physical presence. Of course not on v11 or > older releases, just on HEAD. It is no good to have partitioned indexes > and partitioned tables being handling inconsistently for such things. +1. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: