Re: Support NOT VALID / VALIDATE constraint options for named NOT NULL constraints

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Support NOT VALID / VALIDATE constraint options for named NOT NULL constraints
Date: 2025-03-31 13:10:54
Message-ID: 202503311310.lndncgizziqv@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2025-Mar-31, jian he wrote:

> hi.
> in notnull-notvalid.patch
>
> + if (coninfo->contype == 'c')
> + keyword = "CHECK CONSTRAINT";
> + else
> + keyword = "INVALID NOT NULL CONSTRAINT";
> we have a new TocEntry->desc kind.

Yeah, I wasn't sure that this change made much actual sense. I think it
may be better to stick with just CONSTRAINT. There probably isn't
sufficient reason to have a different ->desc value.

--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2025-03-31 13:30:34 Re: Proposal: Progressive explain
Previous Message Bertrand Drouvot 2025-03-31 13:05:24 Re: Fwd: [BUG]: the walsender does not update its IO statistics until it exits