On Thursday, April 12, 2018, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Jonathan S. Katz > <jonathan.k...@excoventures.com> wrote: > > If there are no strong objections I am going to add this to the “Older > Bugs” > > section of Open Items in a little bit. > > I strongly object. This is not a bug. The TABLESPACE clause doing > exactly what it was intended to do, which is determine where all of > the storage associated with the partitioned table itself goes. It so > happens that there is no storage, so now somebody would like to > repurpose the same option to do something different. > The part about accepting an option that is basically invalid is reasonably bug-like. Having tablespace and partition by clauses be mutually exclusive would be worthy of fixing though it couldn't be back-patched. Documentation is good but outright prevention is better. If we can't agree on the future behavior we should at least prevent the existing situation in v11. I'm doubting whether redefine behavior of the existing option to anything other than an error would be acceptable. David J.
