From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: foreign table creation and NOT VALID check constraints |
Date: | 2017-08-03 03:08:06 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZXNG1wot0waToCjbN4r5CC6aubvBeg0sSmstF9O=UcnQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> On 2017/08/02 20:40, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 3:46 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
>> <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>> If the user has specified "not valid" for a constraint on the foreign
>>> table, there is high chance that s/he is aware of the fact that the
>>> remote table that the foreign table points to has some rows which will
>>> violet the constraint. So, +1.
>>
>> +1 from me, too.
>
> Alright, thanks.
>
> Attached is a patch. I think this could be considered a bug-fix,
> backpatchable to 9.6 which introduced this behavior change [1].
I could go either way on that. It's not inconceivable somebody could
be unhappy about seeing this behavior change in a minor release.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2017-08-03 03:09:56 | Re: map_partition_varattnos() and whole-row vars |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-08-03 03:06:09 | Re: map_partition_varattnos() and whole-row vars |