From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_dump emits ALTER TABLE ONLY partitioned_table |
Date: | 2017-04-12 18:11:54 |
Message-ID: | CA+Tgmob=xywPTSnok_aObFW7OssZi0VV-ke-MSN4hfaz437_3w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 6:29 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> Actually, p1 is a partitioned table, so the error. And I realize that
> that's a wrong behavior. Currently the check is performed using only the
> relkind, which is bogus. Specifying ONLY should cause an error only when
> the table has partitions.
That sounds like a REALLY bad idea, because now you're going to end up
with a constraint that can never be enforced against any actual data
rows ... or else you're going to later pretend that ONLY wasn't
specified. I think the rule that partitioned tables can't have
non-inherited constraints is absolutely right, and relaxing it is
quite wrong.
I think you had the right idea upthread when you suggested dumping it this way:
CREATE TABLE p1 PARTITION OF p (
b NOT NULL
)
FOR VALUES IN (1)
PARTITION BY RANGE (b);
That looks absolutely right to me, and very much principled.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-04-12 18:21:10 | Re: Some thoughts about SCRAM implementation |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2017-04-12 18:09:07 | Re: Some thoughts about SCRAM implementation |