Hi,
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
wrote:
> NikhilS escribi=F3:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> > > If it's a small patch, it's wrong by definition. AFAICS there is no
> way
> > > to fix this correctly that doesn't involve catalog changes. The point
> > > of the TODO is that you have to enforce that the inherited constraint
> > > sticks around, eg can't be dropped on a child table while it's still
> > > present on the parent. There are implications for pg_dump too.
> >
> > Ok, I understand. But even then this could patch could be considered
> even if
> > it does not solve the TODO completely, no? It atleast disallows ONLY ADD
> > CONSTRAINT on the parent.
>
> No, because you would then feel that the TODO item is completed and not
> provide a patch for the whole problem :-)
>
:)
Guess, I should have been wordier in my earlier response and should have
mentioned:
"This patch, if acceptable can be considered as a small step towards the
TODO"
too.
Regards,
Nikhils
--=20
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com