|From:||Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>|
|To:||Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>|
|Subject:||Re: FK NOT VALID can't be deferrable?|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On 15 June 2011 07:56, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Testing the CHECK NOT VALID patch i found $subject... is this intended?
I just noticed that too, and was about to raise it as a bug.
If it is intended, then it's not documented.
I noticed it while browsing gram.y, and thought it looks a bit ugly
having 2 almost identical code blocks, one for the normal case and one
for NOT VALID. The second block doesn't have a
ConstraintAttributeSpec, so won't allow any deferrable options.
Aside from the ugliness of the code, we can't just add a
ConstraintAttributeSpec to the second block, because that would
enforce an order to these options.
OTOH adding NOT VALID to ConstraintAttributeSpec is a bit invasive,
since it's used in quite a few places, including CREATE TABLE, where
NOT VALID is never allowed.
|Next Message||Alexander Korotkov||2011-06-15 08:25:51||Re: WIP: Fast GiST index build|
|Previous Message||Rainer Pruy||2011-06-15 08:13:18||Re: procpid?|