> On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > If it's a small patch, it's wrong by definition. AFAICS there is no way
> > to fix this correctly that doesn't involve catalog changes. The point
> > of the TODO is that you have to enforce that the inherited constraint
> > sticks around, eg can't be dropped on a child table while it's still
> > present on the parent. There are implications for pg_dump too.
> Ok, I understand. But even then this could patch could be considered even if
> it does not solve the TODO completely, no? It atleast disallows ONLY ADD
> CONSTRAINT on the parent.
No, because you would then feel that the TODO item is completed and not
provide a patch for the whole problem :-)
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Martijn van Oosterhout||Date: 2008-03-20 13:16:04|
|Subject: Re: tsearch2 in postgresql 8.3.1 - invalid byte sequence for encoding "UTF8": 0xc3|
|Previous:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2008-03-20 12:36:51|
|Subject: Re: Text <-> C string|
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: NikhilS||Date: 2008-03-20 13:25:43|
|Subject: Re: Problem identifying constraints which should not be inherited|
|Previous:||From: Rui Martins||Date: 2008-03-20 11:57:14|
|Subject: Re: BUG #4044: Incorrect RegExp substring Output|