Re: Review: Non-inheritable check constraints

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Greg Smith
Тема Re: Review: Non-inheritable check constraints
Дата
Msg-id 4EEB87AC.8050401@2ndQuadrant.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Review: Non-inheritable check constraints  (Nikhil Sontakke <nikkhils@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Review: Non-inheritable check constraints  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 12/04/2011 02:22 AM, Nikhil Sontakke wrote:

Is it okay to modify an existing constraint to mark it as "only", even
if it was originally inheritable?  This is not clear to me.  Maybe the
safest course of action is to raise an error.  Or maybe I'm misreading
what it does (because I haven't compiled it yet).


Hmmm, good question. IIRC, the patch will pass is_only as true only if it going to be a locally defined, non-inheritable constraint. So I went by the logic that since it was ok to merge and mark a constraint as locally defined, it should be ok to mark it non-inheritable from this moment on with that new local definition?

With this open question, this looks like it's back in Alvaro's hands again to me.  This one started the CF as "Ready for Committer" and seems stalled there for now.  I'm not going to touch its status, just pointing this fact out.

-- 
Greg Smith   2ndQuadrant US    greg@2ndQuadrant.com   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support  www.2ndQuadrant.us

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Greg Smith
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Prep object creation hooks, and related sepgsql updates
Следующее
От: Greg Smith
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement