| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Backend misfeasance for DEFAULT NULL |
| Date: | 2007-10-28 19:43:21 |
| Message-ID: | 4488.1193600601@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Well if there's a convenient later place to add the check then sure. Will it
> mean pg_dump will have to put DEFAULT NULL everywhere though? Or can it detect
> that it's an inherited table where the default doesn't match?
The latter --- I already committed that fix.
> Perhaps it should be even later and we should store the NULL default in the
> catalog but filter it out when we build the relcache?
No, I don't think we want to be making useless pg_attrdef entries.
I do want to put the test as late as possible though, maybe even
StoreAttrDefault?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-10-28 21:12:45 | Re: Backend misfeasance for DEFAULT NULL |
| Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-10-28 18:14:44 | Re: Backend misfeasance for DEFAULT NULL |