From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: minor tweak to catalogs.sgml pg_class.reltablespace
In-reply-to: <202403191034.scijmnv5lvll@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <202403191034.scijmnv5lvll@alvherre.pgsql>
Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
	message dated "Tue, 19 Mar 2024 11:34:15 +0100"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <3811690.1710855297.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 09:34:57 -0400
Message-ID: <3811691.1710855297@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3811691.1710855297%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
> While reviewing the patch for SET ACCESS METHOD[1] I noticed that
> pg_class.relam is not documented fully for partitioned tables, so I
> proposed the attached.

The bit about "(Not meaningful if the relation has no on-disk file.)"
is not correct, and now it's adjacent to text that contradicts it.
Maybe more like

       The tablespace in which this relation is stored.
       If zero, the database's default tablespace is implied.
       Not meaningful if the relation has no on-disk file,
       except for partitioned tables, where this is the tablespace
       in which partitions will be created when one is not
       specified in the creation command.

			regards, tom lane