On Jul 27, 2011, at 1:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah. If we're going to allow this then we should just have a concept
> of a non-inherited constraint, full stop. This might just be a matter
> of removing the error thrown in ATAddCheckConstraint, but I'd be worried
> about whether pg_dump will handle the case correctly, what happens when
> a new child is added later, etc etc.
Is this looking at the wrong problem? The reason I've wanted to get a parent check constraint not to fire in a child is because I'm using the parent/child relationship for partioning. Will this be relevant if/when an independent partitioning feature is added that does not rely on table inheritance?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Andrew Dunstan||Date: 2011-07-27 20:17:43|
|Subject: Re: Check constraints on partition parents only?|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2011-07-27 20:08:01|
|Subject: Re: Check constraints on partition parents only? |