| From: | Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fix SET EXPRESSION for virtual columns with whole-row dependencies |
| Date: | 2026-06-10 09:05:30 |
| Message-ID: | B28E88B4-F8AA-40BA-A087-12BB9348B1E0@gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On Jun 9, 2026, at 15:28, Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Jun 9, 2026, at 15:23, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 2:23 PM Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> While testing “[f80bedd52] Allow ALTER COLUMN SET EXPRESSION on virtual columns”, I found that the feature missed handling whole-row check constraints.
>>>
>>> Here is a repro:
>>> ```
>>> evantest=# create table t(
>>> evantest(# a int,
>>> evantest(# b int generated always as (a*2) virtual,
>>> evantest(# constraint row_c check (t is not null)
>>> evantest(# );
>>> CREATE TABLE
>>> evantest=# insert into t(a) values(1);
>>> INSERT 0 1
>>> evantest=# alter table t alter b set expression as (nullif(a, 1));
>>> ALTER TABLE
>>> evantest=# select * from t;
>>> a | b
>>> ---+---
>>> 1 |
>>> (1 row)
>>> ```
>>>
>>> The ALTER TABLE should fail, because it makes b become NULL, which breaks the constraint row_c.
>>>
>>
>> Hi.
>>
>> In case you are wondering whole-row objects:
>> ALTER TABLE DROP COLUMN and ALTER COLUMN SET DATA TYPE are covered by
>> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/5988 and
>> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/6055.
>>
>> Meanwhile, ALTER TABLE SET EXPRESSION is being handled over in
>> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/6755
>
> Thanks for pointing out that. I will review 6755.
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Chao Li (Evan)
> HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
> https://www.highgo.com/
>
After reading the other implementation in [1], I realized that I had missed the partial-index case, so I added coverage for that.
I am still sending an updated version of this patch because my implementation is different from the one in [1]. I would like people to compare the two approaches and decide which direction is better.
[1] https://postgr.es/m/CAJTYsWXOkyeDVbzymWc9sKrq7Y_MUv6XJXN4H9GfsBOPd3NJ+w@mail.gmail.com
Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rafia Sabih | 2026-06-10 09:08:48 | Re: postgres_fdw: Emit message when batch_size is reduced |
| Previous Message | Nisha Moond | 2026-06-10 09:03:04 | Re: Support EXCEPT for TABLES IN SCHEMA publications |