Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump emits ALTER TABLE ONLY partitioned_table
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump emits ALTER TABLE ONLY partitioned_table |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoZ7i=xbRuSip4GoY8Nsqy7j7-NXQQ0v38RRdjxQLqHFbA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump emits ALTER TABLE ONLY partitioned_table (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote: > * Robert Haas (robertmhaas@gmail.com) wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 6:29 AM, Amit Langote >> <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: >> > Actually, p1 is a partitioned table, so the error. And I realize that >> > that's a wrong behavior. Currently the check is performed using only the >> > relkind, which is bogus. Specifying ONLY should cause an error only when >> > the table has partitions. >> >> That sounds like a REALLY bad idea, because now you're going to end up >> with a constraint that can never be enforced against any actual data >> rows ... or else you're going to later pretend that ONLY wasn't >> specified. I think the rule that partitioned tables can't have >> non-inherited constraints is absolutely right, and relaxing it is >> quite wrong. > > I'm not following what you're getting at here. Urk, I might be confusing ONLY with NO INHERIT. Let me think about this again... -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: