Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning vs. information_schema
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning vs. information_schema |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoYrA8SK=KjkVbvKt8hG3Cqsjr-Hnmwa3WXqbziRuwKBLg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning vs. information_schema (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Declarative partitioning vs. information_schema
Re: Declarative partitioning vs. information_schema |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 1/18/17 2:32 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> Unless we can find something official, I suppose we should just >> display BASE TABLE in that case as we do in other cases. I wonder if >> the schema needs some broader revision; for example, are there >> information_schema elements intended to show information about >> partitions? > > Is it intentional that we show the partitions by default in \d, > pg_tables, information_schema.tables? Or should we treat those as > somewhat-hidden details? I'm not really sure what the right thing to do is there. I was hoping you had an opinion. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: