On Sep 7, 2013, at 7:20 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alban Hertroys writes:
>> On Sep 7, 2013, at 6:54, Steve Atkins wrote:
If I have a partitioned table that has some range constraints that look
kinda like they're intended for constraint exclusion, but aren't quite
non-overlapping,
Alban Hertroys writes:
> On Sep 7, 2013, at 6:54, Steve Atkins wrote:
>>> If I have a partitioned table that has some range constraints that look
>>> kinda like they're intended for constraint exclusion, but aren't quite
>>> non-overlapping, will that break anything?
> Next to that, putting da
On Sep 7, 2013, at 6:54, Steve Atkins wrote:
> On Sep 6, 2013, at 9:37 PM, François Beausoleil wrote:
>
>> Le 2013-09-07 à 00:29, Steve Atkins a écrit :
>>
>>> If I have a partitioned table that has some range constraints that look
>>> kinda like they're intended for constraint exclusion, but
On Sep 6, 2013, at 9:37 PM, François Beausoleil wrote:
>
> Le 2013-09-07 à 00:29, Steve Atkins a écrit :
>
>> If I have a partitioned table that has some range constraints that look
>> kinda like they're intended for constraint exclusion, but aren't quite
>> non-overlapping, will that break
Le 2013-09-07 à 00:29, Steve Atkins a écrit :
> If I have a partitioned table that has some range constraints that look kinda
> like they're intended for constraint exclusion, but aren't quite
> non-overlapping, will that break anything?
>
> e.g.
>
> create table jan ( …, check(created >= '2
