| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Odd behavior of partitioned ALTER TABLE ONLY ... ADD PRIMARY KEY |
| Date: | 2019-04-21 19:40:29 |
| Message-ID: | 16954.1555875629@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2019-Apr-21, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ISTM that this is a bug, not a feature: if there's any point at
>> all to saying ONLY in this context, it's that we're not supposed
>> to be doing anything as expensive as adding a new constraint to
>> a child partition. No? So I think that this should have failed.
> Hmm, yeah, this is not intentional and I agree that it shouldn't be
> doing this.
>> We need to require the partition(s) to already have attnotnull set.
> Sounds good to me, yes.
> Do you want me to see about this?
It's tied up in the other patch I'm working on, so I can deal with it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-04-21 21:21:28 | Re: ALTER TABLE with ADD COLUMN and ADD PRIMARY KEY USING INDEX throws spurious "column contains null values" |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2019-04-21 19:36:13 | Re: Odd behavior of partitioned ALTER TABLE ONLY ... ADD PRIMARY KEY |