Re: Review of patch renaming constraints
| От | Nikhil Sontakke |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Review of patch renaming constraints |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CANgU5ZcCv-v=LCivv6qL2aa2nZnVCEt7Afy2zLkET6k3RP++xQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Review of patch renaming constraints (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Review of patch renaming constraints
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
> Make check passed. Patch has tests for rename constraint.That appears to be because creating a primary key constraint does not
>
> Most normal uses of alter table ... rename constraint ... worked normally. However, the patch does not deal correctly with constraints which are not inherited, such as primary key constraints:
set pg_constraint.conisonly correctly. This was introduced recently
with noninherited check constraints.
Umm, conisonly is set as false from primary key entries in pg_constraint. And primary keys are anyways not inherited. So why is the conisonly field interfering in rename? Seems quite orthogonal to me.
Regards,
Nikhils
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: