Re: [HACKERS] New partitioning - some feedback
| От | Craig Ringer |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] New partitioning - some feedback |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAMsr+YEW0xStC0opNSPRq9qkhu5YtQgEoR+EYXJXsAx3mTZwog@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] New partitioning - some feedback (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] New partitioning - some feedback
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 8 July 2017 at 00:03, David Fetter <david@fetter.org> wrote:
On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 10:29:26AM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> On 2017/07/07 9:02, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> > I've been trying out the new partitioning in version 10. Firstly, I must
> > say this is excellent - so much nicer than the old inheritance based method!
>
> Thanks. :)
>
> > My only niggle is the display of partitioned tables via \d etc. e.g:
> >
> > part=# \d
> > List of relations
> > Schema | Name | Type | Owner
> > --------+----------------------+-------+----------
> > public | date_fact | table | postgres
> > public | date_fact_201705 | table | postgres
> > public | date_fact_201706 | table | postgres
> > public | date_fact_20170601 | table | postgres
> > public | date_fact_2017060100 | table | postgres
> > public | date_fact_201707 | table | postgres
> > public | date_fact_rest | table | postgres
> > (7 rows)
Would showing relispartition=tru tables only in \d+ fix this?
I think so.
I'd like to add a flag of some kind to \d column output that marks a table as having partitions, but I can't think of anything narrow enough and still useful.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: