Re: not null constraints, again

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Tender Wang <tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: not null constraints, again
Date: 2024-09-20 21:15:19
Message-ID: 202409202115.c3pbrwyfqrui@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2024-Sep-20, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> Yeah, there's a bunch of conflicts in current master. I rebased
> yesterday but I'm still composing the email for v4. Coming soon.

Okay, so here is v4 with these problems fixed, including correct
propagation of constraint names to children tables, which I had
inadvertently broken earlier. This one does pass the pg_upgrade tests
and as far as I can see pg_dump does all the correct things also. I
cleaned up the tests to remove everything that's unneeded, redundant, or
testing behavior that no longer exists.

I changed the behavior of ALTER TABLE ONLY <parent> ADD PRIMARY KEY, so
that it throws error in case a child does not have a NOT NULL constraint
on one of the columns, rather than silently creating such a constraint.
(This is how `master` currently behaves). I think this is better
behavior, because it lets the user decide whether they want to scan the
table to create that constraint or not. It's a bit crude at present,
because (1) a child could have a NO INHERIT constraint and have further
children, which would foil the check (I think changing
find_inheritance_children to find_all_inheritors would be sufficient to
fix this, but that's only needed in legacy inheritance not
partitioning); (2) the error message doesn't have an errcode, and the
wording might need work.

--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Learn about compilers. Then everything looks like either a compiler or
a database, and now you have two problems but one of them is fun."
https://twitter.com/thingskatedid/status/1456027786158776329

Attachment Content-Type Size
v4-0001-Catalog-not-null-constraints.patch text/x-diff 290.4 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jonah H. Harris 2024-09-20 21:34:06 Re: Why mention to Oracle ?
Previous Message Marcos Pegoraro 2024-09-20 20:26:49 Re: Why mention to Oracle ?