On 2018/11/12 12:59, Tom Lane wrote: > Amit Langote <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> writes: >> On 2018/11/10 7:33, Tom Lane wrote: >>> I'd argue not, actually. I think there is plausible precedent in >>> updatable views, where what we use is the defaults associated with the >>> view, not the underlying table. Correspondingly, what ought to govern >>> in a partitioned insert is the defaults associated with the table actually >>> named in the insert command, never mind what its partitions might say. >>> That is useful for many situations, and it avoids all the logical >>> inconsistencies you get into if you find that the defaults associated >>> with some partition would force re-routing elsewhere. > >> ... >> IOW, it might be a good idea to call the ability to set partition-level >> defaults a deprecated feature? > > Not necessarily. They'd apply when you insert directly into a particular > partition by name.
Yes. Maybe, we should document that the partition default are not honored when inserting through the parent. Thanks, Amit
