| From: | Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Chao Li" <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, "jian he" <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "L(dot) pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fix bug of CHECK constraint enforceability recursion |
| Date: | 2026-05-26 07:32:39 |
| Message-ID: | cb4a41fd-67e8-47ed-bcff-d0549dce3f02@app.fastmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2026-05-26, Chao Li wrote:
>> On May 26, 2026, at 14:05, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Overall, i tend to think that we should reject ALTER TABLE ALTER
>> CONSTRAINT if it
>> would result in the parent constraint being enforced while the child constraint
>> is not enforced.
Yeah.
> I am not against the idea of "rejecting ALTER TABLE ALTER CONSTRAINT if
> it would result in the parent constraint being enforced while the child
> constrain is not enforced", but I’m afraid it’s too late for PG19. So,
> I guess we still need to fix the issue for 19, right?
I think this is a bug that we need to fix in 19 as well — I mean we should reject the ALTER TABLE.
--
Álvaro Herrera
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chao Li | 2026-05-26 07:44:01 | Re: Fix bug of CHECK constraint enforceability recursion |
| Previous Message | Jelte Fennema-Nio | 2026-05-26 07:22:07 | Re: libpq maligning postgres stability |