Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning
| От | Jeevan Ladhe |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAOgcT0O6Yy9zEcHdfE5Y84A6oi2qB8PnpZUHZN+5=tzJD4kT=A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Adding support for Default partition in partitioning
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:01 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Jeevan Ladhe
> <jeevan.ladhe@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> I have fixed the crash in attached patch.
>> Also the patch needed bit of adjustments due to recent commit.
>> I have re-based the patch on latest commit.
>
> + bool has_default; /* Is there a default partition?
> Currently false
> + * for a range partitioned table */
> + int default_index; /* Index of the default list
> partition. -1 for
> + * range partitioned tables */
>
We have has_null and null_index for list partitioning. There
null_index == -1 = has_null. May be Rahila and/or Jeevan just copied
that style. Probably we should change that as well?
I agree with Ashutosh.
I had given similar comment on earlier version of patch[1], and Rahila reverted
with above reasoning, hence did not change the logic she introduced.
Probably its a good idea to have a separate patch that removes has_null logic,
in a separate thread.
Regards,
Jeevan Ladhe.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: