From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: BUG #15212: Default values in partition tables don't work as expected and allow NOT NULL violation |
Date: | 2018-11-08 16:38:09 |
Message-ID: | 20181108163809.mb7dstn2j244fvuf@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
On 2018-Nov-09, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 1:03 AM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > On 2018-Nov-07, Amit Langote wrote:
> > Hmm, I'm thinking perhaps we shouldn't backpatch this part. It's
> > obviously a bug, but we might break somebody's working apps. Therefore
> > I think I'd rather leave it out of the current bugfix and commit
> > separately.
>
> Okay, that may be fine because nothing wrong is happening by silently
> ignoring the partition's specified collation.
Actually, how about we reduce the message to a WARNING in released
branches, and ERROR in master? Broken applications would continue to
work, but users might become aware that there might be a problem.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-11-08 17:24:20 | Re: BUG #15479: Documentation claims that client_min_messages is related to logging |
Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2018-11-08 16:30:18 | Re: BUG #15212: Default values in partition tables don't work as expected and allow NOT NULL violation |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2018-11-08 17:26:16 | Re: New function pg_stat_statements_reset_query() to reset statistics of a specific query |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2018-11-08 16:34:44 | Re: ATTACH/DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY |