On 2017/08/17 13:56, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 8:06 AM, Amit Langote > <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: >> On 2017/08/17 11:22, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 10:12 PM, Amit Langote >>> <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: >>>>> In the catalogs we are using full "partitioned" e.g. >>>>> pg_partitioned_table. May >>>>> be we should name the column as "inhchildpartitioned". >>>> >>>> Sure. >>> >>> I suggest inhpartitioned or inhispartition. inhchildpartitioned seems too >>> long. >> >> inhchildpartitioned indeed seems long. >> >> Since we storing if the child table (one with the OID inhrelid) is >> partitioned, inhpartitioned seems best to me. Will implement that. > > inhchildpartitioned is long but clearly tells that the child table is > partitioned, not the parent. pg_inherit can have parents which are not > partitioned, so it's better to have self-explanatory catalog name. I > am fine with some other name as long as it's clear.
OTOH, the pg_inherits field that stores the OID of the child table does not mention "child" in its name (inhrelid), although you are right that inhpartitioned can be taken to mean that the inheritance parent (inhparent) is partitioned. In any case, system catalog documentation which clearly states what's what might be the best guide for the confused. Of course, we can add a comment in pg_inherits.h next to the field explaining what it is for those reading the source code and confused about what inhpartitioned means. Thanks, Amit -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
