Re: list partition constraint shape

On 2018/02/01 6:08, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 1:22 AM, Amit Langote > wrote: >>> Updated patch attached. Because I made no changes >>> other than that, I'll make this as Ready for Committer. >> Thanks a lot for reviewing. > > Committed and

Re: list partition constraint shape

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 1:22 AM, Amit Langote wrote: >> Updated patch attached. Because I made no changes >> other than that, I'll make this as Ready for Committer. > Thanks a lot for reviewing. Committed and back-patched to v10. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB:

Re: list partition constraint shape

Fujita-san, On 2018/01/29 15:15, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > (2018/01/29 9:50), Amit Langote wrote: >> On 2018/01/26 21:31, Etsuro Fujita wrote: >>> Attached is a modified >>> version of the patch.  What do you think about that?  Please let me know. >>> If that is okay, I'll mark this as Ready for

Re: list partition constraint shape

(2018/01/29 9:50), Amit Langote wrote: On 2018/01/26 21:31, Etsuro Fujita wrote: Attached is a modified version of the patch. What do you think about that? Please let me know. If that is okay, I'll mark this as Ready for Committer. That looks good, thanks. Cool! One thing I noticed to

Re: list partition constraint shape

Fujita-san, On 2018/01/26 21:31, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > (2018/01/26 10:15), Amit Langote wrote: >> On 2018/01/25 21:17, Etsuro Fujita wrote: >>> Some minor comments: >>> >>> +   /* >>> +    * Construct an ArrayExpr for the non-null partition >>> +   

Re: list partition constraint shape

(2018/01/26 10:15), Amit Langote wrote: On 2018/01/25 21:17, Etsuro Fujita wrote: Some minor comments: + /* +* Construct an ArrayExpr for the non-null partition +* values +*/ + arrexpr =

Re: list partition constraint shape

Fujita-san, Thanks for the review. On 2018/01/25 21:17, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > Thanks for the updated patch!  Some minor comments: > > +   /* > +    * Construct an ArrayExpr for the non-null partition > +    * values > +    */ > +  

Re: list partition constraint shape

(2018/01/25 18:44), Amit Langote wrote: On 2018/01/23 20:13, Etsuro Fujita wrote: Here are review comments that I have for now: * I think it's a good idea to generate an OR expression tree for the case where the type of the partitioning key is an array, but I'm not sure we should handle other

Re: list partition constraint shape

Fujita-san, Thanks for the review. On 2018/01/23 20:13, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > (2017/12/13 16:38), Amit Langote wrote: >> Attached patch is an attempt at that.  With the patch, instead of >> internally generating an ANY/ALL expression, generate an OR expression >> instead.  So: >> >> \d+ p1 >>

Re: list partition constraint shape

(2017/12/13 16:38), Amit Langote wrote: I recently posted to the list about a couple of problems I saw when using array type column as the partition key. One of them was that the internal partition constraint expression that we generate for list partitions is of a form that the backend would