On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 9:29 AM Chao Li <[email protected]> wrote: > > On May 20, 2026, at 14:19, Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi, Chao! > > > > On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 2:37 AM Chao Li <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> On May 19, 2026, at 19:00, Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 5:50 AM Chao Li <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> On May 18, 2026, at 20:04, Alexander Korotkov <[email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 2:57 PM Chao Li <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>> <v3-0003-Clarify-SPLIT-PARTITION-bound-requirements-in-doc.patch><v3-0001-Fix-SPLIT-PARTITION-range-bound-validation-with-D.patch><v3-0002-Fix-SPLIT-PARTITION-hint-for-DEFAULT-partition-bo.patch><v3-0004-Reject-degenerate-SPLIT-PARTITION-with-DEFAULT-pa.patch> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> v3-0001 through v3-0003 look good to me. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> For v3-0004, I have a suspicion, but it's late here and my brain is > >>>>>> getting slow, so I would like to study it more tomorrow. > >>>>> > >>>>> Sure, take your time. > >>>>> > >>>>> ------ > >>>>> Regards, > >>>>> Alexander Korotkov > >>>>> Supabase > >>>> > >>>> My suspicion was that check_split_partition_not_same_bound() now has two > >>>> paths. The RANGE path honors collation, while the LIST path does not. So > >>>> I spent some time creating a test that uses a case-insensitive collation: > >>>> ``` > >>>> evantest=# create collation case_insensitive (provider=icu, > >>>> locale='und-u-ks-level2', deterministic = false); > >>>> CREATE COLLATION > >>>> evantest=# create table t (b text collate case_insensitive) partition by > >>>> list (b); > >>>> CREATE TABLE > >>>> evantest=# create table tp_ab partition of t for values in ('a', 'b'); > >>>> CREATE TABLE > >>>> evantest=# alter table t split partition tp_ab into > >>>> evantest-# (partition tp_a for values in ('a', 'A'), > >>>> evantest(# partition tp_default default); > >>>> ERROR: cannot split partition "tp_ab" only to add a DEFAULT partition > >>>> LINE 2: (partition tp_a for values in ('a', 'A'), > >>>> ^ > >>>> DETAIL: The non-DEFAULT partition would keep the same partition bound. > >>>> HINT: Use CREATE TABLE ... PARTITION OF ... DEFAULT to add a DEFAULT > >>>> partition. > >>>> ``` > >>>> > >>>> In this test, the split partition’s bound is ('a', 'b'), and the new > >>>> partition’s bound is ('a', 'A'). Their list lengths are both 2, but the > >>>> two bounds are actually different, because 'a' and 'A' are considered > >>>> equal by the collation. > >>>> > >>>> So, in the LIST path, since check_partition_bounds_for_split_list() has > >>>> already ensured that the new partition’s bound is contained within the > >>>> split partition’s bound, we need to check the reverse direction as well. > >>>> Whether the split partition’s bound is also contained in the new > >>>> partition’s bound. If yes, the two bounds are identical. > >>>> > >>>> See the attached v4 for my changes for 0004. 0001-0003 are unchanged. > >>>> Since 0001 and 0003 are independent of 0004, maybe they can be pushed > >>>> first. > >>> > >>> I've pushed 0001-0003. > >> > >> Thanks for pushing them. > >> > >>> Thank you for discovering the collation issue > >>> in 0004. Note that original approach of using > >>> partition_bounds_equal() can't handle different collations too (as it > >>> internally uses datumIsEqual()). > >> > >> Yes, I realized that while reviewing v3. That’s reason I didn’t get back > >> v2 and only worked again based on v3. > >> > >>> I've revised the remaining patch: > >>> made function header comment a bit more detailed > >> > >> This part looks good to me. > >> > >>> and added additional > >>> regression tests. Please, check. > >>> > >> > >> But I don’t see any change for regression test between v4 and v5. Maybe > >> you forgot to save your changes? > > > > Sorry, I just mess up, no changes in tests. > > I'm going to push this if no objection. > > > > No worries. Then v5 looks good to me.
Thank you, pushed. ------ Regards, Alexander Korotkov Supabase
