From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Chris Bandy <bandy(dot)chris(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #6080: information_schema.columns.column_default contains NULL inconsistently |
Date: | 2011-07-05 16:52:16 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmobOqhUu=C=-h0EGWRuL_k-nwJDP6E6iG_6967G4zvtD9w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> The code that recognizes a default expression as being just constant
>>> NULL doesn't think this is a constant NULL. In principle it could
>>> recognize that, since the cast function is marked strict, but so far
>>> it has not seemed worth the trouble.
>
>> Gee, does Noah's recent patch adding the notion of "transform
>> functions" have any applicability to this problem?
>
> Not really. If someone held a gun to my head and said "fix that", what
> I'd do is run eval_const_expressions() on the default expression and see
> if that resulted in a constant NULL. But it seems unlikely to be worth
> the cycles in most cases. Also, we'd then need some other test to
> address the issue explained in AddRelationNewConstraints:
>
> /*
> * If the expression is just a NULL constant, we do not bother to make
> * an explicit pg_attrdef entry, since the default behavior is
> * equivalent.
> *
> * Note a nonobvious property of this test: if the column is of a
> * domain type, what we'll get is not a bare null Const but a
> * CoerceToDomain expr, so we will not discard the default. This is
> * critical because the column default needs to be retained to
> * override any default that the domain might have.
> */
> if (expr == NULL ||
> (IsA(expr, Const) &&((Const *) expr)->constisnull))
> continue;
>
> IOW, there are cases where "DEFAULT NULL" is *not* a no-op.
Interesting. A possible reason to care about this is that it might
convert a form of ALTER TABLE that requires a rewrite into one that
doesn't, since we needn't rewrite the table if the column will be
all-nulls. That's not enough of a benefit to motivate me to do the
work myself, since all the examples thus-far shown involve writing the
default in a way that's more complicated than necessary. But I'd have
a hard time objecting if someone else wanted to run it down, since I'm
pretty sure I've written an ALTER TABLE that way once or twice myself.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2011-07-05 17:24:16 | Re: Re: PG regression with row comparison when btree_gist is enabled (BUG) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-07-05 16:42:13 | Re: BUG #6080: information_schema.columns.column_default contains NULL inconsistently |