Re: Mutable foreign key constraints

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Mutable foreign key constraints
Date: 2024-09-14 14:51:49
Message-ID: 263959.1726325509@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On 2024-09-12 Th 5:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm inclined to propose rejecting FK constraints if the comparison
>> operator is not immutable.

> Isn't there an upgrade hazard here? People won't thank us if they can't
> now upgrade their clusters. If we can get around that then +1.

Yeah, they would have to fix the bad DDL before upgrading. It'd
be polite of us to add a pg_upgrade precheck for such cases,
perhaps.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Junwang Zhao 2024-09-14 14:54:06 Re: why there is not VACUUM FULL CONCURRENTLY?
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2024-09-14 14:39:11 Re: meson vs windows perl