Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h1Qpc-0003bO-LQ for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2019 07:19:12 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h1QpZ-0002sp-El for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2019 07:19:09 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h1QpY-0002lD-VH for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2019 07:19:09 +0000 Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h1QpW-0002sC-7n for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2019 07:19:07 +0000 Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9939624DD7; Wed, 6 Mar 2019 02:19:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 06 Mar 2019 02:19:05 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=paquier.xyz; h= date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=fm1; bh=2zurNkOqU2YLYriXkF0trWHxY1x EBdHYV+Kxz9d9ULY=; b=gMa77bAidy9sAS2zlsCVGgvigpu5Lc19lyqUnuHoOc1 BSwCDL9GoKq51TwHA2tISlqKxz7qexJ2s2Wrb6zMZRsFx13g2LgqYUqx9Ejd3IqE u87aQpR+9smVmwSyn/f9VAubKzFaJEhOhXyvljd1+w46UvD7nFLyL8o+tRLOHRWy bV48NRzafz0cd+sd10IO2cOA1JwfL0eJgSiXkIRUtBDfm3yapBi4W3YoOWkmS8w2 GwzLQLFFKfU1elo8IWwKp5+6ZhgE4md7GpaY2ukXm/URH3KB1jR5Qyd/2k+q9P8o /uhUdv01OMirLaW52QtNL5U3c8n9NCyjtyBQuoyXeqA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=2zurNk OqU2YLYriXkF0trWHxY1xEBdHYV+Kxz9d9ULY=; b=XfVD1Ioq2tRsX+GIo5gIdu RX+7JysmMxFLvbg4kqEr3c2sxrygp/pGSvTxxbpmWMf6gYqLcs6a+PVjvRAEhE0I wENhvEfC0XZrhUW5eU+g1TNvpcYE8e1A3NvwyAPyrVUc+FR0u6542x53tWyXEh+m VDI9CD6uP27o3sTnAxAZTaQyu3ouHSlwBq+Uo/2fHtWfB/eAvunMJCQLn7LDYvur 1tYojaElG5AIXKPq26V+okTz0wPZ5znDgxW5g8dvWFK5R+wXyym6opMnDqUn6n+W ml6syN2OETheKyf/kiZK+r6ucFtR+J+8ltd7slUTaro1mibMHhPuMPhrjvlQzHPA == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedutddrfeeggddutdelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne gfrhhlucfvnfffucdljedtmdenucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesghdtreertddt vdenucfhrhhomhepofhitghhrggvlhcurfgrqhhuihgvrhcuoehmihgthhgrvghlsehprg hquhhivghrrdighiiiqeenucfkphepiedurddvudehrddufeejrdduiedvnecurfgrrhgr mhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmihgthhgrvghlsehprghquhhivghrrdighiiinecuvehluh hsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from paquier.xyz (c137162.net61215.cablenet.ne.jp [61.215.137.162]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 21FA310335; Wed, 6 Mar 2019 02:19:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2019 16:19:00 +0900 From: Michael Paquier To: David Rowley Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers , Alvaro Herrera , Andres Freund Subject: Re: pg_dump is broken for partition tablespaces Message-ID: <20190306071900.GI30982@paquier.xyz> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rmUrFcWP4LYae1gV" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk --rmUrFcWP4LYae1gV Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 07:45:06PM +1300, David Rowley wrote: > Partitioned indexes have this similar inherit tablespace from parent > feature, so ca4103025dfe26 was intended to align the behaviour of the > two. Partitioned indexes happen not to suffer from the same issue as > the indexes are attached after their creation similar to what I > propose above. >=20 > Can anyone see any fundamental reason that we should not create a > partitioned table by doing CREATE TABLE followed by ATTACH PARTITION? > If not, I'll write a patch that fixes it that way. The part for partitioned indexes is already battle-proven, so if the part for partitioned tables can be consolidated the same way that would be really nice. > As far as I can see, the biggest fundamental difference with doing > things this way will be that the column order of partitions will be > preserved, where before it would inherit the order of the partitioned > table. I'm a little unsure if doing this column reordering was an > intended side-effect or not. I don't see any direct issues with that to be honest thinking about it.. -- Michael --rmUrFcWP4LYae1gV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEG72nH6vTowiyblFKnvQgOdbyQH0FAlx/dGQACgkQnvQgOdby QH3QLw//Xq4pOcQy2K6a0kLk6fFh6cF1jIh0lj3PTgCbYBXv+/42x428Fh8hek8N qjKqoOEcu6Yul9Vj62//4wCR/RzSqUEzPhgXf6W1xw9/HfuXfdur/7TLKs9Hcd+F 0u9xzi7VAjpCkBC5HFdZx0uB9hsFRJDUqEDFZlg5bqWLYKNQrFq3Pr3PvcXc2TvG Fxg4Tkf+Z9FlNB1xLbciD7+kGQYC8RRZKSFYC0G2sqqMDqhESrHVndAxLh43JHcd o18eRF5ox/trdY/hRR7ZDwp3g4+tL6HgVl6LWoS474s2DQebJMyU6+QOAh5Z+RUi ebROQgD+k4pXC0zgqU4b3MnD5oj3TeuFYLxX6wRMjXuFZ0x1yuN1R0junDZokc2y FZ0OoDP1fUE++IUzrcGbMsIvgXCfp1F0xQsqrn72Jzkl6tWzjJdzsbo/Vo6cWM9j Eq4hV2dDSxazgg6ShNlx2iNrROImwLKNRDFwjWEvmGAarH3xx2Gr1g2v1YqjGap4 Ism/dF7W/0sGRzHNjx0pAi3Uunf0KnLBvSzfwTXzU1AuOnOowrtdTCW/6kU18kMx rUCQp2xwQyL7kWT4Tx2TDvBYlg9LFXB6hngvjIv0Zedb3ACaLMTjY4bTlYPgp1hu 0Z9q0h6fRSIcDq1eo2RemKlJCwK0RHMi3b8WtjElvVKACOeDSmw= =XOH2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rmUrFcWP4LYae1gV--