Re: [HACKERS] Multi column range partition table
От | Dean Rasheed |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Multi column range partition table |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAEZATCWuQ8g79NYWkHdqnGXMpBMho6iTj+CPkt13kjzLPzL-uQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Multi column range partition table (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Multi column range partition table
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 6 July 2017 at 21:04, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> writes: >> However, this is also an incompatible syntax change, and any attempt >> to support both the old and new syntaxes is likely to be messy, so we >> really need to get consensus on whether this is the right thing to do, >> and whether it *can* be done now for PG10. > > FWIW, I'd much rather see us get it right the first time than release > PG10 with a syntax that we'll regret later. I do not think that beta2, > or even beta3, is too late for such a change. > > I'm not taking a position on whether this proposal is actually better > than what we have. But if there's a consensus that it is, we should > go ahead and do it, not worry that it's too late. > OK, thanks. That's good to know. Regards, Dean
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: