Re: [HACKERS] Range Partitioning behaviour - query

2017-02-23 Thread Venkata B Nagothi
On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 12:38 PM, David G. Johnston < david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Amit Langote < > langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > >> On 2017/02/24 8:38, Venkata B Nagothi wrote: >> > On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Amit Langote wrote: >> >>

Re: [HACKERS] Range Partitioning behaviour - query

2017-02-23 Thread Venkata B Nagothi
On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > On 2017/02/24 10:38, David G. Johnston wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Amit Langote < > langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp > >> wrote: > > > >> On 2017/02/24 8:38, Venkata B Nagothi wrote: > >>> On Thu,

Re: [HACKERS] Range Partitioning behaviour - query

2017-02-23 Thread Amit Langote
On 2017/02/24 10:38, David G. Johnston wrote: > On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Amit Langote > wrote: > >> On 2017/02/24 8:38, Venkata B Nagothi wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Amit Langote wrote: Upper bound of a range partition is an exclusive

Re: [HACKERS] Range Partitioning behaviour - query

2017-02-23 Thread David G. Johnston
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > On 2017/02/24 8:38, Venkata B Nagothi wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > >> Upper bound of a range partition is an exclusive bound. A note was > added > >> recently to the

Re: [HACKERS] Range Partitioning behaviour - query

2017-02-23 Thread Amit Langote
On 2017/02/24 8:38, Venkata B Nagothi wrote: > On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Amit Langote wrote: >> Upper bound of a range partition is an exclusive bound. A note was added >> recently to the CREATE TABLE page to make this clear. >> >>

Re: [HACKERS] Range Partitioning behaviour - query

2017-02-23 Thread Venkata B Nagothi
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > Hi, > > On 2017/02/23 11:55, Venkata B Nagothi wrote: > > Hi Hackers, > > > > I have noticed the following behaviour in range partitioning which i felt > > is not quite correct (i missed reporting this) - > >

Re: [HACKERS] Range Partitioning behaviour - query

2017-02-22 Thread Amit Langote
Hi, On 2017/02/23 11:55, Venkata B Nagothi wrote: > Hi Hackers, > > I have noticed the following behaviour in range partitioning which i felt > is not quite correct (i missed reporting this) - > > I have tested by creating a date ranged partition. > > I created the following table. > > db03=#

[HACKERS] Range Partitioning behaviour - query

2017-02-22 Thread Venkata B Nagothi
Hi Hackers, I have noticed the following behaviour in range partitioning which i felt is not quite correct (i missed reporting this) - I have tested by creating a date ranged partition. I created the following table. db03=# CREATE TABLE orders ( o_orderkey INTEGER, o_custkey