Re: Postgres Partitions Limitations (5.11.2.3)
От | Laurenz Albe |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Postgres Partitions Limitations (5.11.2.3) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | c8345f6323d6ea9c22e0f44125fd9815081c4c80.camel@cybertec.at обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Postgres Partitions Limitations (5.11.2.3) (PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org>) |
Список | pgsql-docs |
On Fri, 2023-01-06 at 08:28 +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote: > The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: > > Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/ddl-partitioning.html > Description: > > Link: > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/ddl-partitioning.html#DDL-PARTITIONING-DECLARATIVE > > "Using ONLY to add or drop a constraint on only the partitioned table is > supported as long as there are no partitions. Once partitions exist, using > ONLY will result in an error. Instead, constraints on the partitions > themselves can be added and (if they are not present in the parent table) > dropped." This seems in contradiction to the example involving adding a > unique constraint while minimizing locking at the bottom of "5.11.2.2. > Partition Maintenance", which seems to run fine on my local Pg instance: > > " > This technique can be used with UNIQUE and PRIMARY KEY constraints too; the > indexes are created implicitly when the constraint is created. Example: > > ```ALTER TABLE ONLY measurement ADD UNIQUE (city_id, logdate); > > ALTER TABLE measurement_y2006m02 ADD UNIQUE (city_id, logdate); > ALTER INDEX measurement_city_id_logdate_key > ATTACH PARTITION measurement_y2006m02_city_id_logdate_key; > ... > ``` > " > > I might be misinterpreting something. Sorry if that's the case! No, that is actually an omission in the documentation. The attached patch tries to improve that. Yours, Laurenz Albe
Вложения
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: