From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: phil.bayer@gmail.com, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Postgres 11: Table Partitioning and Primary Keys
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2019 23:10:51 -0400
Message-ID: <18801.1562641851@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190709025856.GC1345@paquier.xyz>
References: <156236160709.1192.4498528196556144085@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
<20190709023737.vhrd4pxe4hgnd3ks@momjian.us>
<20190709025856.GC1345@paquier.xyz>
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
> Attached is an idea of patch for the documentation, using this
> wording:
> + <listitem>
> + <para>
> + When defining a primary key on a partitioned table, the primary
> + key column must be included in the partition key.
> + </para>
> + </listitem>
Isn't it the other way around, that the partition key column(s) must be
included in the primary key? Maybe I'm confused, but it seems like
we couldn't enforce PK uniqueness otherwise.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, michael@paquier.xyz, bruce@momjian.us, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Postgres 11: Table Partitioning and Primary Keys
In-Reply-To: <18801.1562641851@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox