Re: Can't find not null constraint, but \d+ shows that
От | Tender Wang |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Can't find not null constraint, but \d+ shows that |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAHewXNnx0Og84CbP+mqs_1WMdO_oDz87N+K2bLoc4+SB8ogMNg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Can't find not null constraint, but \d+ shows that (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Can't find not null constraint, but \d+ shows that
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> 于2024年4月19日周五 02:49写道:
On 2024-Apr-13, jian he wrote:
> I wonder is there any incompatibility issue, or do we need to say something
> about the new behavior when dropping a key column?
Umm, yeah, maybe we should document it in ALTER TABLE DROP PRIMARY KEY
and in the release notes to note the different behavior.
> only minor cosmetic issue:
> + if (unconstrained_cols)
> i would like change it to
> + if (unconstrained_cols != NIL)
>
> + foreach(lc, unconstrained_cols)
> we can change to
> + foreach_int(attnum, unconstrained_cols)
> per commit
> https://git.postgresql.org/cgit/postgresql.git/commit/?id=14dd0f27d7cd56ffae9ecdbe324965073d01a9ff
Ah, yeah. I did that, rewrote some comments and refined the tests a
little bit to ensure the pg_upgrade behavior is sane. I intend to get
this pushed tomorrow, if nothing ugly comes up.
The new patch looks good to me.
CI run: https://cirrus-ci.com/build/5471117953990656
Tender Wang
OpenPie: https://en.openpie.com/В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: