Re: Adding support for Default partition in partitioning

Installed and compiled against commit 60a0b2ec8943451186dfa22907f88334d97cb2e0 (Date: Tue Apr 4 12:36:15 2017 -0400) without any issue

However, running your original example, I'm getting this error

keith@keith=# CREATE TABLE list_partitioned (             
keith(#     a int
keith(# ) PARTITION BY LIST (a);
CREATE TABLE
Time: 4.933 ms
keith@keith=# CREATE TABLE part_default PARTITION OF list_partitioned FOR VALUES IN (DEFAULT);
CREATE TABLE
Time: 3.492 ms
keith@keith=# CREATE TABLE part_1 PARTITION OF list_partitioned FOR VALUES IN (4,5);
ERROR:  unrecognized node type: 216
Time: 0.979 ms

Also, I'm still of the opinion that denying future partitions of values in the default would be a cause of confusion. In order to move the data out of the default and into a proper child it would require first removing that data from the default, storing it elsewhere, creating the child, then moving it back. If it's only a small amount of data it may not be a big deal, but if it's a large amount, that could cause quite a lot of contention if done in a single transaction. Either that or the user would have to deal with data existing in the table, disappearing, then reappearing again.

This also makes it harder to migrate an existing table easily. Essentially no child tables for a large, existing data set could ever be created without going through one of the two situations above.

However, thinking through this, I'm not sure I can see a solution without the global index support. If this restriction is removed, there's still an issue of data duplication after the necessary child table is added. So guess it's a matter of deciding which user experience is better for the moment?

--
Keith Fiske
Database Administrator
OmniTI Computer Consulting, Inc.
http://www.keithf4.com