Re: cataloguing NOT NULL constraints

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: cataloguing NOT NULL constraints
Date: 2023-08-28 12:55:54
Message-ID: 099f86fc-59e9-89f5-0791-a892075651dc@eisentraut.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 25.08.23 13:38, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I have now pushed this again. Hopefully it'll stick this time.
>
> We may want to make some further tweaks to the behavior in some cases --
> for example, don't disallow ALTER TABLE DROP NOT NULL when the
> constraint is both inherited and has a local definition; the other
> option is to mark the constraint as no longer having a local definition.
> I left it the other way because that's what CHECK does; maybe we would
> like to change both at once.
>
> I ran it through CI, and the pg_upgrade test with a dump from 14's
> regression test database and everything worked well, but it's been a
> while since I tested the sepgsql part of it, so that might the first
> thing to explode.

It looks like we forgot about domain constraints? For example,

create domain testdomain as int not null;

should create a row in pg_constraint?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2023-08-28 13:00:05 Re: proposal: psql: show current user in prompt
Previous Message Daniel Gustafsson 2023-08-28 12:32:24 Re: Cirrus-ci is lowering free CI cycles - what to do with cfbot, etc?