On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Jeevan Ladhe
<jeevan.la...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> Hi Beena,
>
> I went through your patch, and here are some of my comments:
>
Thank you for your comments. I will take care of them in the next
version of patch.
> - I am sorry, but I could not understand following hunk. Does this change
> really
> belongs to this patch? If not, it will be better to handle it separately.
>
> @@ -2242,33 +2387,16 @@ get_partition_for_tuple(PartitionDispatch *pd,
> ecxt->ecxt_scantuple = slot;
> FormPartitionKeyDatum(parent, slot, estate, values, isnull);
>
> - if (key->strategy == PARTITION_STRATEGY_RANGE)
> + if (key->strategy == PARTITION_STRATEGY_LIST && isnull[0])
> {
> /*
> - * Since we cannot route tuples with NULL partition keys through
> - * a range-partitioned table, simply return that no partition
> - * exists
> + * A null partition key is only acceptable if null-accepting list
> + * partition exists.
> */
In RANGE, initially NULL was not allowed, now NULL is routed to
default. I have only removed the check for null in RANGE and kept the
check for null partition in case of list.
--
Beena Emerson
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
