From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Review: Non-inheritable check constraints |
Date: | 2011-12-16 19:06:51 |
Message-ID: | 1324059105-sup-5611@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Greg Smith's message of vie dic 16 15:02:20 -0300 2011:
> On 12/04/2011 02:22 AM, Nikhil Sontakke wrote:
> >
> > Is it okay to modify an existing constraint to mark it as "only", even
> > if it was originally inheritable? This is not clear to me. Maybe the
> > safest course of action is to raise an error. Or maybe I'm misreading
> > what it does (because I haven't compiled it yet).
> >
> >
> > Hmmm, good question. IIRC, the patch will pass is_only as true only if
> > it going to be a locally defined, non-inheritable constraint. So I
> > went by the logic that since it was ok to merge and mark a constraint
> > as locally defined, it should be ok to mark it non-inheritable from
> > this moment on with that new local definition?
I think I misread what that was trying to do. I thought it would turn
on the "is only" bit on a constraint that a child had inherited from a
previous parent, but that was obviously wrong now that I think about it
again.
> With this open question, this looks like it's back in Alvaro's hands
> again to me. This one started the CF as "Ready for Committer" and seems
> stalled there for now. I'm not going to touch its status, just pointing
> this fact out.
Yeah. Nikhil, Alex, this is the merged patch. Have a look that it
still works for you (particularly the pg_dump bits) and I'll commit it.
I adjusted the regression test a bit too.
Thanks.
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
non_inh_check_v4.patch | application/octet-stream | 28.7 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2011-12-16 19:11:01 | Re: patch for type privileges |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2011-12-16 18:49:48 | Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement |