On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Jeevan Ladhe <jeevan.la...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Hi Beena, > > I went through your patch, and here are some of my comments: >
Thank you for your comments. I will take care of them in the next version of patch. > - I am sorry, but I could not understand following hunk. Does this change > really > belongs to this patch? If not, it will be better to handle it separately. > > @@ -2242,33 +2387,16 @@ get_partition_for_tuple(PartitionDispatch *pd, > ecxt->ecxt_scantuple = slot; > FormPartitionKeyDatum(parent, slot, estate, values, isnull); > > - if (key->strategy == PARTITION_STRATEGY_RANGE) > + if (key->strategy == PARTITION_STRATEGY_LIST && isnull[0]) > { > /* > - * Since we cannot route tuples with NULL partition keys through > - * a range-partitioned table, simply return that no partition > - * exists > + * A null partition key is only acceptable if null-accepting list > + * partition exists. > */ In RANGE, initially NULL was not allowed, now NULL is routed to default. I have only removed the check for null in RANGE and kept the check for null partition in case of list. -- Beena Emerson 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