From: | Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nikhil Sontakke <nikhil(dot)sontakke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Jerry Sievers <gsievers19(at)comcast(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Check constraints on partition parents only? |
Date: | 2011-07-27 21:54:03 |
Message-ID: | CAFaPBrRe=Vyt=dbDUujvT0_+wYjDRU+pvF=HaGrcJ6z6ZFSm=A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 14:08, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Yeah. If we're going to allow this then we should just have a concept
> of a non-inherited constraint, full stop. This might just be a matter
> of removing the error thrown in ATAddCheckConstraint, but I'd be worried
> about whether pg_dump will handle the case correctly, what happens when
> a new child is added later, etc etc.
[ For those who missed it ]
pg_dump getting things wrong was a big reason to disallow
ONLYconstraints. That is pg_dump did not treat ONLY constraints
correctly, it always tried to stick them on the parent table:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-04/msg00026.php
I for example had some backups that had to be manually fixed (by
removing constraints) to get them to import. I would wager the
mentioned clients that have been doing this have broken backups as
well :-(
Now that we have coninhcnt, conislocal etc... we can probably support
ONLY. But I agree with Robert it's probably a bit more than an
afternoon to crank out :-)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Kupershmidt | 2011-07-27 21:57:28 | Re: psql: bogus descriptions displayed by \d+ |
Previous Message | Florian Pflug | 2011-07-27 21:37:15 | Is a heads-up in 9.1 in order regarding the XML-related changes in 9.2? |