Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3864.400.21\))
Subject: Re: Fix SPLIT PARTITION bound-overlap bug and other improvements
From: Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAPpHfdsLnD3NGnPC32oeg4ZWWX441M=SfH0-7bG652G40TpEEQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2026 19:56:55 +0800
Cc: Dmitry Koval <d.koval@postgrespro.ru>,
 PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4B04275C-E044-4EEE-BE64-6FEEE73DCBB0@gmail.com>
References: <C18878AB-DEB2-4A61-9995-A035DD644B81@gmail.com>
 <4df20e70-a083-4334-9548-5f8b9025847c@postgrespro.ru>
 <D4A592C8-76F4-41A4-9746-2FED6BED625A@gmail.com>
 <CAPpHfdvdevTMpjQe09aWdK_nbrE4+M1z09H2SUe3bgxY3_QUdA@mail.gmail.com>
 <C0F7F893-D33E-4698-938E-612D08305CF6@gmail.com>
 <CAPpHfdsLnD3NGnPC32oeg4ZWWX441M=SfH0-7bG652G40TpEEQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4B04275C-E044-4EEE-BE64-6FEEE73DCBB0%40gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk


> On May 18, 2026, at 17:16, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>=20
> On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 2:15=E2=80=AFAM Chao Li =
<li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On May 18, 2026, at 05:45, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>>>=20
>>> Hi, Chao!
>>>=20
>>> On Thu, May 14, 2026 at 9:59=E2=80=AFAM Chao Li =
<li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> To make this patch easier to process, I split it into 4 commits:
>>>>=20
>>>> 0001 - Fixes the bound-overlap bug
>>>> 0002 - Fix the incorrect HINT message for the DEFAULT case
>>>> 0003 - Fix the incorrect description about combined bound in the =
SGML doc
>>>> 0004 - Reject only-create-default-partition usage
>>>=20
>>> Thank you for your work.  I've revised the patchset.
>>> 0002 - I've also fixed gramma of hints in other branches
>>> 0004 - In the check_split_partition_not_same_bound(), calling
>>> partition_bounds_create() and partition_bounds_equal() looks a bit
>>> heavyweight.  It doesn't matter much performance-wise, but it feels
>>> like start processing from scratch while we're on quite late stage
>>> already.  I've replaced that with more lightweight check.  Also I
>>> removed dealing with memory context.  This code implies small
>>> non-repetitive memory allocations which only lives during DDL
>>> operation, no need to wrap them with memory context as we don't do =
so
>>> in other places.
>>>=20
>>> Any objections if I commit this?
>>>=20
>>> ------
>>> Regards,
>>> Alexander Korotkov
>>> Supabase
>>=20
>> Hi Alexander,
>>=20
>> Thanks for the revisions. I think you may have missed the =
attachments, so I cannot review the changes.
>=20
> Sorry. Here it is.
>=20
> ------
> Regards,
> Alexander Korotkov
> Supabase
> =
<v3-0003-Clarify-SPLIT-PARTITION-bound-requirements-in-doc.patch><v3-0001-=
Fix-SPLIT-PARTITION-range-bound-validation-with-D.patch><v3-0002-Fix-SPLIT=
-PARTITION-hint-for-DEFAULT-partition-bo.patch><v3-0004-Reject-degenerate-=
SPLIT-PARTITION-with-DEFAULT-pa.patch>

v3-0001 through v3-0003 look good to me.

For v3-0004, I have a suspicion, but it's late here and my brain is =
getting slow, so I would like to study it more tomorrow.

Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/