Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Jonathan S. Katz
> <jonathan.k...@excoventures.com> wrote:
> > If there are no strong objections I am going to add this to the “Older Bugs”
> > section of Open Items in a little bit.
> I strongly object. This is not a bug. The TABLESPACE clause doing
> exactly what it was intended to do, which is determine where all of
> the storage associated with the partitioned table itself goes. It so
> happens that there is no storage, so now somebody would like to
> repurpose the same option to do something different. That's fine, but
> it doesn't make the current behavior wrong. And we're certainly not
> going to back-patch a behavior change like that.
Keep in mind that we do not offer any promises to fix items listed in
the Older Bugs section; as I said elsewhere, it's mostly a dumping
ground for things that get ignored later. I think it's fine to add it
there, if Jon wants to keep track of it, on the agreement that it will
probably not lead to a backpatched fix.
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services