Hi, I have addressed Ashutosh's and Amit's comments in the attached patch.
Please let me know if I have missed anything and any further comments.
PFA.
Regards,
Jeevan Ladhe
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Beena Emerson <memissemer...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 8:13 AM, Amit Langote
> <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> > On 2017/05/31 9:33, Amit Langote wrote:
> >
> >
> > In get_rule_expr():
> >
> > case PARTITION_STRATEGY_LIST:
> > Assert(spec->listdatums != NIL);
> >
> > + /*
> > + * If the boundspec is of Default partition, it
> does
> > + * not have list of datums, but has only one
> node to
> > + * indicate its a default partition.
> > + */
> > + if (isDefaultPartitionBound(
> > + (Node *)
> linitial(spec->listdatums)))
> > + {
> > + appendStringInfoString(buf, "DEFAULT");
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> >
> > How about adding this part before the switch (key->strategy)? That way,
> > we won't have to come back and add this again when we add range default
> > partitions.
>
> I think it is best that we add a bool is_default to PartitionBoundSpec
> and then have a general check for both list and range. Though
> listdatums, upperdatums and lowerdatums are set to default for a
> DEFAULt partition, it does not seem proper that we check listdatums
> for range as well.
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Beena Emerson
>
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>
default_partition_v18.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
