po 19. 11. 2018 v 3:42 odesÃlatel Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> napsal:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 11:17:37PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > To be certain I'm not going against some old decision, I digged up > > Amit's old patches. Turns out he submitted psql's describe.c using the > > term "partitioned table" on August 10th [1] and then based on a > > discussion where Robert suggested calling these new objects "partition > > roots" instead to avoid confusion, it was changed to "table" in the next > > submission on August 26th [2]. It seems the right call to have used the > > term "table" in many places (rather than "partition roots"), but at > > least in psql's \dt it seems extremely useful to show the type as > > "partitioned table" instead, because it is one place where the > > distinction is clearly useful. > > +1. > > > In this thread there have been no contrary votes, so I'm pushing this > > part soon. > > > > [1] > https://postgr.es/m/ad16e2f5-fc7c-cc2d-333a-88d4aa446...@lab.ntt.co.jp > > [2] > https://postgr.es/m/169708f6-6e5a-18d1-707b-1b323e4a6...@lab.ntt.co.jp > > Sorry for degressing, but could you also update \di at the same time so > as it shows "partitioned index"? listTables() should be switched to use > partitioned tables and partitioned indexes, and permissionsList() has a > reference to partitioned tables. While on it, this gives the attached.. > It has sense Pavel -- > Michael >
