Re: ALTER TABLE...ALTER COLUMN vs inheritance
От | Alex Hunsaker |
---|---|
Тема | Re: ALTER TABLE...ALTER COLUMN vs inheritance |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 34d269d40911161000g46bfa76v7ce8b857b8db3b90@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: ALTER TABLE...ALTER COLUMN vs inheritance (Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: ALTER TABLE...ALTER COLUMN vs inheritance
Re: ALTER TABLE...ALTER COLUMN vs inheritance |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:56, Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de> wrote: > I've just started looking into this and wonder how this should look like. IIRC another motivation for moving them into pg_constraint was we could then give them names as required by the spec (unless I got mixed up with defaults). Looking at the 2003 spec I don't see any grammar for that, so either I cant find it (likely) or its not there. Either way I see something like the below options: ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN ADD CONSTRAINT my_not_null NOT NULL; [ we dont currently support add constraint on ALTER COLUMN AFAICT... but it might be nice? ] -or- ALTER TABLE ADD CONSTRAINT my_not_null NOT NULL (column); -or- ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN column SET NOT NULL 'name'; Comments? Anyway Bernd if you are working on this great! If not lemme know, Ill plan on having something for the next commit feast. Though I still may never get around to it :(. FYI defaults have the same problem. Would it be awkward would it be to use pg_constraint for the book keeping as well? [ and by that I really mean ALTER TABLE ADD CONSTRAINT my_default DEFAULT .... so you can give them a name ]
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: