On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > I'm okay with prohibiting the case of different persistence values as > you suggest. And I do suggest to back-patch that prohibition to pg10.
I disagree. There's nothing any more broken about the way this works with partitioning in v10 than the way it works with inheritance in 9.6 or prior. Table inheritance has had warts for years, and the fact that we now have table partitioning doesn't make all of those same warts into must-fix-now bugs. They are still just warts, and they should be cleaned up through future development as we find them and have the time to do something about them. They should be documented as incompatibilities where appropriate. They should not be jammed into stable branches because users don't like it when DDL works one way in 10.1 and another way in 10.2. They don't even really like it when 10.0 works differently from 11.0, but you have to be willing to see bad decisions revisited at some point if you want progress to happen, and I certainly do. > Let me add that I'm not looking to blame anyone for what I report here. > I'm very excited about the partitioning stuff and I'm happy of what was > done for pg10. I'm now working on more partitioning-related changes > which means I review the existing code as I go along, so I just report > things that look wrong to me as I discover them, just with an interest > in seeing them fixed, or documented, or at least discussed and > explicitly agreed upon. Fair enough, but when you reply on the thread where I committed the patch and propose back-patching to the release that contained it, you make it sound like it's a bug in the patch, and I don't think either of the two things you just raised are. My complaint is not that I think you are accusing me of any sort of wrongdoing but that you're trying to justify back-patching what I think is new development by characterizing it as a bug fix. -- Robert Haas 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
