From: | Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, andrewbille(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #19074: pg_dump from v18 loses the NOT NULL flag in the inherited table field when dumping v17-databases |
Date: | 2025-10-06 10:44:28 |
Message-ID: | 202510061043.hjzm5ixk5tfs@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On 2025-Oct-06, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> While quickly checking this commit, it seems the problem is that
> before this commit we had a simple logic to add an additional ALTER
> TABLE to SET NULL, if the attribute has a not null constraint but the
> the parent from which it is inherited doesn't have not null constraint
> [1]. Whereas after this commit, it seems we removed this ALTER
> command and tried to add the not null constraint while creating the
> inherited table itself, which is fine. But here the logic to identify
> whether the constraint is local or not for v17 is not correct [2], it
> sets "notnull_islocal", only if the "attislocal" is true, which seems
> to be wrong. Because the test case given in this bug the attribute is
> not local but it is marked not null.
Ah, right, the column is indeed not local, but the constraint is. I
think this means we need to use flagInhAttrs to require the constraint
to be printed ... looking.
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Rowley | 2025-10-06 11:34:56 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #11500: PRIMARY KEY index not being used |
Previous Message | Marco Boeringa | 2025-10-06 10:40:01 | Re: Potential "AIO / io workers" inter-worker locking issue in PG18? |