| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, shihao zhong <zhong950419(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Nikolay Samokhvalov <nik(at)postgres(dot)ai>, Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: [PG19] Three bugs with a CHECK constraint that only the child enforces |
| Date: | 2026-11-01 15:56:54 |
| Message-ID: | b486fad0-beba-445a-9461-b035be42026b@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2026-10-30 Fr 5:43 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 2026-10-29 Th 1:05 AM, jian he wrote:
>> To summarize where this thread:
>>
>> v5-0001 is a fix for PG19.
>>
>> v5-0002 and v5-0003 fix the problem for PG18 as well. However, they
>> require us to accept that pg_dump may restore a child's inherited CHECK
>> constraint with pg_constraint.conislocal = true, even though it was
>> false
>> in the original database.
>> The visible consequence is that, after a
>> restore, ALTER TABLE ... DROP CONSTRAINT on the parent no longer
>> drops the
>> child's copy of the constraint; the child keeps it as a local
>> constraint.
>> (Given table inheritance is not liked by many people, maybe it's OK to
>> change conislocal for table inheritance, but not partitioning
>> inheritance)
>>
>>
>
> Yeah, I'm going to commit patch 0001, which is pretty straightforward,
> to close the pg19 open item, and leave the remaining items for later
> discussion.
>
>
>
Done.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2026-11-01 16:14:28 | Re: Internal error codes triggered by regression tests and user queries, take 2 |
| Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2026-11-01 15:31:19 | Re: Incremental backup can use a summary past a timeline switch |