Re: Check constraints on partition parents only?
| От | Andrew Dunstan |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Check constraints on partition parents only? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4E307267.6000506@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Check constraints on partition parents only? ("David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 07/27/2011 04:14 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote: > On Jul 27, 2011, at 1:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Yeah. If we're going to allow this then we should just have a concept >> of a non-inherited constraint, full stop. This might just be a matter >> of removing the error thrown in ATAddCheckConstraint, but I'd be worried >> about whether pg_dump will handle the case correctly, what happens when >> a new child is added later, etc etc. > Is this looking at the wrong problem? The reason I've wanted to get a parent check constraint not to fire in a child isbecause I'm using the parent/child relationship for partioning. Will this be relevant if/when an independent partitioningfeature is added that does not rely on table inheritance? > > Yes, I have clients using inheritance for non-partitioning purposes, and they would love to have this. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: