Thank you so much.
I tested and it worked as you mentioned i.e the template table is helping
to add the extra indexes or constraints to the child table/partitions (by
inheriting those from the template table if defined), those are not defined
there in the main table. Also dropping the default part
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 at 01:24, sud wrote:
> While testing the pg_partman extension I see it by default creates a
> "default partition" even if we provide the parameter p_start_partition as
> "current date". But if someone purposely doesn't want to have the default
> partitions , so as to avoid any
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 5:29 AM Adrian Klaver
wrote:
> > 4)Never created or maintained any partition table in postgres. Here we
> > want to daily range partition the both tables based on column
> > "PARENT_CREATE_TIMESTAMP", so is it advisable to create the individual
> > future partitions post t
Thank you so much. This really helped.
Regards
Sud
>
*"1)In this situation , do we have to drop the "Schema_Owner" and
recreate it with all small letters? And then create the schema with small
letters again?"*
As per above question goes, I believe OP is not required to drop and
recreate but has to just Rename the user something as below and that w
On 2/20/24 13:19, sud wrote:
Hi,
We are newly creating tables in postgres 15.4 version and we got the DDL
auto generated from one of the tools and they look something like below.
(note- I have modified the exact names to some dummy names.) These are
all failing because the schema which already
sud writes:
> We are newly creating tables in postgres 15.4 version and we got the DDL
> auto generated from one of the tools and they look something like below.
> (note- I have modified the exact names to some dummy names.) These are all
> failing because the schema which already exists in the da
