Re: creating CHECK constraints as NOT VALID

From: Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>
To: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: creating CHECK constraints as NOT VALID
Date: 2011-06-11 13:40:59
Message-ID: BANLkTimWanXbnJpfP9bvt-G2MLN8uFfMTg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 11 June 2011 14:32, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On 1 June 2011 23:47, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> Here's a complete patch with all this stuff, plus doc additions and
>> simple regression tests for the new ALTER DOMAIN commands.
>>
>>    Enable CHECK constraints to be declared NOT VALID
>>
>>    This means that they can initially be added to a large existing table
>>    without checking its initial contents, but new tuples must comply to
>>    them; a separate pass invoked by ALTER TABLE / VALIDATE can verify
>>    existing data and ensure it complies with the constraint, at which point
>>    it is marked validated and becomes a normal part of the table ecosystem.
>>
>
> I think that you also need to update the constraint exclusion code
> (get_relation_constraints() or nearby), otherwise the planner might
> exclude a relation on the basis of a CHECK constraint that is not
> currently VALID.

Do the standards explicitly stipulate an expected behaviour for this?
And does such a problem affect the invalid foreign key change too?

--
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #516935

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dean Rasheed 2011-06-11 15:40:54 Re: creating CHECK constraints as NOT VALID
Previous Message Dean Rasheed 2011-06-11 13:32:15 Re: creating CHECK constraints as NOT VALID