On 2018-11-12 17:33, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> One of the guiding principles that I think we should hold for >> partitioning is that operating directly into the partition should be >> seen as only an optimization compared to inserting into the parent table >> -- thus it should not behave differently. Applying different default >> values depending on where you're inserting into goes counter to that >> principle. > > I'm not entirely convinced that I buy that argument, especially not in > a case like this where it introduces logical inconsistencies where there > otherwise wouldn't be any. >
I think I missed something, what are the *introduced* logical problems? Apart from implementation issues the only logical problems I see are if you allow to change defaults of the partition key columns, and these are problematic (nonsensical really) in either case. Regards, Jürgen
