From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Check constraints on non-immutable keys |
Date: | 2010-06-30 18:16:33 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTimVvF2MboiGKc0n5KMpCLfA8yIocfqKl4_gfUBu@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 20:13, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 19:16, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> I concur with the thought that the most useful solution might be a way
>>> to tell pg_restore to remove or disable check constraints.
>
>> Uh, say what? Are you saying pg_restore should actually remove
>> something from the database schema? And thus no longer be valid for
>> taking database backups?
>
> pg_restore, not pg_dump. It's no more unreasonable an idea than the
> current pg_restore options for selective restores, AFAICS. You can
> already cause pg_restore to not restore PK and FK constraints, for
> example, so why not check constraints?
Oh, sorry, I misread that - I thought you suggested it would do so by
default. Clearly, I should've left work about 2 minutes earlier and
not bothered you with that response :-)
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-06-30 18:34:49 | Re: Admission Control |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-06-30 18:14:11 | Re: [BUGS] Server crash while trying to read expression using pg_get_expr() |