Subject: overlapping ranges

From: PG Doc comments form <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 20:58:32 +0000

The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:

Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/ddl-partitioning.html
Description:

In the date partitioning example the first and last dates are the first of
the month, which will cause conflicts. The last date needs to be the final
day of the same month.

---

From: Peter Eisentraut <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 17:26:37 -0500

> the month, which will cause conflicts. The last date needs to be the final

I don't think so, because the upper bound of the range is not included
in the range.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

---

From: Nick Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 09:39:48 +1100

Further down the page, that is contradicted, where there are numeric ranges
spaced every hundred, where it says that is disallowed because of the
ambiguity at the overlap point. Either way, the documentation is
inconsistent.

---

From: Pantelis Theodosiou <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 09:31:48 +0000

The CREATE TABLE page has this explanation, about FROM and TO in
partitioning declarations:

> When creating a range partition, the lower bound specified with FROM is
an inclusive bound, whereas the upper bound specified with TO is an
exclusive bound. That is, the values specified in the FROM list are valid
values of the corresponding partition key columns for this partition,
whereas those in the TO list are not.

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 10:39 PM, Nick Farrell <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> Further down the page, that is contradicted, where there are numeric
> ranges spaced every hundred, where it says that is disallowed because of
> the ambiguity at the overlap point. Either way, the documentation is
> inconsistent.
>
> On 21 Jan. 2018 9:26 am, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.
> com> wrote:
>

---

From: Peter Eisentraut <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 13:06:39 -0500

On 1/20/18 17:39, Nick Farrell wrote:
> the ambiguity at the overlap point.

That talks about the old way of doing partitioning, which works
differently in this respect.