Re: ADD/DROPS INHERIT (actually INHERIT / NO INHERIT)

Patch applied.  Thanks.

I ran pgindent on the tablecmds.c block of code, and cleaned up some
boolean assignments.  There are a few XXX comments still in the code so
someone should look at those questions and either modify the code or
remove the comments.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------


Greg Stark wrote:
>
> I cleaned up the code and added some more documentation.
>
> I think I've addressed all the concerns raised so far. Please tell me if I've
> missed anything.
>
> There were a few tangentially related issues that have come up that I think
> are TODOs. I'm likely to tackle one or two of these next so I'm interested in
> hearing feedback on them as well.
>
> . Constraints currently do not know anything about inheritance. Tom suggested
>   adding a coninhcount and conislocal like attributes have to track their
>   inheritance status.
>
> . Foreign key constraints currently do not get copied to new children (and
>   therefore my code doesn't verify them). I don't think it would be hard to
>   add them and treat them like CHECK constraints.
>
> . No constraints at all are copied to tables defined with LIKE. That makes it
>   hard to use LIKE to define new partitions. The standard defines LIKE and
>   specifically says it does not copy constraints. But the standard already has
>   an option called INCLUDING DEFAULTS; we could always define a non-standard
>   extension LIKE table INCLUDING CONSTRAINTS that gives the user the option to
>   request a copy including constraints.
>
> . Personally, I think the whole attislocal thing is bunk. The decision about
>   whether to drop a column from children tables or not is something that
>   should be up to the user and trying to DWIM based on whether there was ever
>   a local definition or the column was acquired purely through inheritance is
>   hardly ever going to match up with user expectations.
>
> . And of course there's the whole unique and primary key constraint issue. I
>   think to get any traction at all on this you have a prerequisite of a real
>   partitioned table implementation where the system knows what the partition
>   key is so it can recognize when it's a leading part of an index key.
>
>

[ Attachment, skipping... ]

>
>
> --
> greg

>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

--
  Bruce Momjian   bruce@momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +