Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On 07/25/2011 10:31 PM, Jerry Sievers wrote:
>> I just noticed that somewhere between 8.2 and 8.4, an exception is
>> raised trying to alter table ONLY some_partition_parent ADD CHECK
> 8.4 had this change:
> Force child tables to inherit CHECK constraints from parents
> (Alex Hunsaker, Nikhil Sontakke, Tom)
> Formerly it was possible to drop such a constraint from a
> child table, allowing rows that violate the constraint to be
> visible when scanning the parent table. This was deemed
> inconsistent, as well as contrary to SQL standard.
> You're not the only one who occasionally bangs his head against it.
Thanks Andrew!... Yeah, I figured it was a documented change but too
lazy tonight to browse release notes :-)
The previous behavior was to me convenient, but I agree, probably lead
to some confusion too.
That our version of partitioning can be overloaded like this though I
think adds power. A bit of which we lost adding the restrictgion.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jeff Davis||Date: 2011-07-26 03:15:45|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Error calling PG_RETURN_NULL()|
|Previous:||From: Andrew Dunstan||Date: 2011-07-26 02:44:32|
|Subject: Re: Check constraints on partition parents only?|