On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > What I'm going to ask one more time, though, is why we are even discussing > this. Surely the partition bounds of a partitioned table must all be of > the same type already. If there is a case where they are not, that is > a bug we had better close off before v10 ships, not a feature that we > need to write a lot of code to accommodate.
This question was answered before, by Ashutosh. http://postgr.es/m/cafjfprfakso4yzjvv7jkcmemvgdcnqc4yhqvwho5gczb5mw...@mail.gmail.com Since you either didn't read his answer, or else didn't understand it and didn't bother asking for clarification, I'll try to be more blunt: of course all of the partition bounds of a single partitioned table have to be of the same type. We're not talking about that, because no kidding. This thread is about the possibility -- in a future release -- of implementing a join between two different partitioned tables by joining each pair of matching partitions. To do that, you need the tables to be compatibly partitioned, which requires that the partitioning columns use the same opfamily for each partitioning column but not necessarily that the types be the same. Making partition-wise join work in the case where the partitioning columns are of different types within an opfamily (like int4 vs. int8) is giving Ashutosh a bit of trouble. So this is about a cross-type join, not multiple types within a single partitioning hierarchy, as you might also gather from the subject line of this thread. -- 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
