Re: pg_constraint.conincluding is useless

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Subject: Re: pg_constraint.conincluding is useless
Date: 2018-09-07 19:48:29
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 01:27:25PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > This requires a catversion bump, for which it may seem a bit late;
> > however I think it's better to release pg11 without a useless catalog
> > column only to remove it in pg12 ...
> Catversion bumps during beta are routine. If we had put out rc1
> I'd say it was too late, but we have not.
> If we do do a bump for beta4, I'd be strongly tempted to address the
> lack of a unique index for pg_constraint as well, cf

Uh, if we add a unique index later, wouldn't that potentially cause
future restores to fail? Seems we better add it now.

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2018-09-07 20:02:57 Re: pg_constraint.conincluding is useless
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2018-09-07 19:09:37 Re: A strange GiST error message or fillfactor of GiST build