Re: [HACKERS] Multi column range partition table

On 6 July 2017 at 22:43, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> wrote:
> I agree we should get this right the first time and I also agree with
> Dean's proposal, so I guess I'm a +2
>

On 7 July 2017 at 03:21, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> +1 to releasing this syntax in PG 10.
>

So, that's 3 votes in favour of replacing UNBOUNDED with
MINVALUE/MAXVALUE for range partition bounds in PG 10. Not a huge
consensus, but no objections either. Any one else have an opinion?

Robert, have you been following this thread?

I was thinking of pushing this later today, in time for beta2.

Regards,
Dean