Re: Shouldn't pg_(sh)seclabel.provider be marked NOT NULL?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: Shouldn't pg_(sh)seclabel.provider be marked NOT NULL?
Дата
Msg-id A971FEB4-4BF3-49FD-B771-B107A15BA3B9@gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Shouldn't pg_(sh)seclabel.provider be marked NOT NULL?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Shouldn't pg_(sh)seclabel.provider be marked NOT NULL?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
> On Jun 20, 2014, at 10:01 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Some of my Salesforce colleagues are looking into making every system
> catalog be declared with a true primary key.  They came across the
> fact that pg_seclabel and pg_shseclabel are declared with unique
> indexes that include the "provider" column, but that column does not
> get marked as NOT NULL during initdb.  Shouldn't it be?

At some point, I inferred a rule that catalog columns were intended to be either both fixed-width and not nullable; or
variable-widthand nullable. I believe the current situation is the result of that inference... but I see no particular
reasonnot to change it. 

...Robert


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Joe Conway
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [bug fix] Memory leak in dblink
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Shouldn't pg_(sh)seclabel.provider be marked NOT NULL?