Re: Check constraints on partition parents only?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Check constraints on partition parents only? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 15123.1311797281@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Check constraints on partition parents only? (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Check constraints on partition parents only?
Re: Check constraints on partition parents only? Re: Check constraints on partition parents only? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > Well, I don't have anything strongly against the idea of an > uninherited constraint, though it sounds like Tom does. But I think > allowing it just in the case of CHECK (false) would be pretty silly. > And, I'm fairly certain that this isn't going to play nice with > coninhcount... local constraints would have to be marked as local, > else the wrong things will happen later on when you drop them. Yeah. If we're going to allow this then we should just have a concept of a non-inherited constraint, full stop. This might just be a matter of removing the error thrown in ATAddCheckConstraint, but I'd be worried about whether pg_dump will handle the case correctly, what happens when a new child is added later, etc etc. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: