Re: Fix comment in ATExecValidateConstraint

On 2016/08/19 5:35, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 5:15 AM, Amit Langote
> <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>> On 2016/07/25 17:18, Amit Langote wrote:
>>> The comment seems to have been copied from ATExecAddColumn, which says:
>>>
>>> /*
>>> * If we are told not to recurse, there had better not be any
>>> - * child tables; else the addition would put them out of step.
>>>
>>> For ATExecValidateConstraint, it should say something like:
>>>
>>> + * child tables; else validating the constraint would put them
>>> + * out of step.
>>>
>>> Attached patch fixes it.
>>
>> I noticed that the ALTER TABLE documentation doesn't mention that VALIDATE
>> CONSTRAINT will fail if ONLY is specified and there are descendant tables.
>> It only mentions that a constraint cannot be renamed unless also renamed
>> in the descendant tables.
>>
>> Attached patch fixes that.
>
> I did some wordsmithing on the two patches you posted to this thread.
> I suggest the attached version. What do you think?

Reads much less ambiguous, so +1.

Except in the doc patch:

s/change the type of a column constraint/change the type of a column/g

I fixed that part in the attached.

Thanks,
Amit