On 10 May 2018 at 21:56, David Rowley <david.row...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 10 May 2018 at 17:42, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> Patch is good. >> >> The cause of this oversight is the lack of comments to explain the >> original coding, so we need to correct that in this patch, please. > > Thanks for looking. > > Yeah, the comments do need work. In order to make it a bit easier to > document I changed the way that check_partition_constr is set. This is > now done with an if/else if/else clause for both COPY and INSERT. > > Hopefully, that's easier to understand and prevents further mistakes. > > Patch attached.
While this does not cause any undesired behaviour, I think it's quite clear that it's unintended, so I've added this to the v11 open items list. If there's consensus that this is not the case then we can remove it from the list. I've just added it to ensure that a proper evaluation has been done. -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
