Re: [HACKERS] PG10 partitioning - odd behavior/possible bug

2017-11-28 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 6:42 PM, Joe Conway wrote: > Yeah, Tom already pointed that out a while back: > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20986.1504478066%40sss.pgh.pa.us Ah, sorry, hadn't seen that. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Compan

Re: [HACKERS] PG10 partitioning - odd behavior/possible bug

2017-11-28 Thread Joe Conway
On 11/28/2017 04:40 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Joe Conway wrote: >> I was playing around with partitioning and found an oddity that is best >> described with the following reasonably minimal test case: > > I can reproduce this without partitioning, just by creating t

Re: [HACKERS] PG10 partitioning - odd behavior/possible bug

2017-11-28 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Joe Conway wrote: > I was playing around with partitioning and found an oddity that is best > described with the following reasonably minimal test case: I can reproduce this without partitioning, just by creating two independent tables with the same schema and twea