Re: [BUGS] BUG #3973: pg_dump using inherited tables do not always restore
От | Alex Hunsaker |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [BUGS] BUG #3973: pg_dump using inherited tables do not always restore |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 34d269d40803031107t4b353603h34ed6226659f218@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: [BUGS] BUG #3973: pg_dump using inherited tables do not always restore
|
Список | pgsql-patches |
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "Alex Hunsaker" <badalex@gmail.com> writes: > > create table junk (val integer not null, val2 integer); > > create table junk_child () inherits (junk_1); > > alter table junk_child alter column val drop not null; > > insert into junk_child (val2) values (1); > > > pg_dump -t junk -t junk_child > > > pg_restore/psql will fail because junk_child.val now has a not null > > constraint > > Actually the bug is that ALTER TABLE allows you to do that. It should > not be possible to drop an inherited constraint, but right now there's > not enough information in the system catalogs to detect the situation. > Fixing this has been on the TODO list for awhile: > > o %Prevent child tables from altering or dropping constraints > like CHECK that were inherited from the parent table > > regards, tom lane > Hrm how about something like the attached patch? It only handles set not null/drop not null. And I thought about making it so set default behaved the same way, but i can see how that can be useful in the real world. Thoughts? Arguably pg_dump should just do something similar to what it does for set default (because that dumps correctly)... I only say that because there specific regressions test for the behavior I outlined above. Which is now "broken" with my patch. Be gentle... its my first dive into postgresql guts...
Вложения
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: