On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 10:00 AM Kirill Reshke <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 11 Aug 2025 at 14:53, jian he <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 7:35 AM Robert Treat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > + if (rel->rd_rel->relkind == RELKIND_RELATION && > > > + cmdcon->is_enforced && > > > + !currcon->conenforced) > > > > > > i think I have convinced myself that this is correct, but maybe I will > > > ask you if you had any concerns that this needed to also consider > > > RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE as well? > > > > > > > ATExecAlterCheckConstrEnforceability itself will be recursive to all > > the children. > > AlterConstrUpdateConstraintEntry is responsible for changing the catalog > > state. > > except the changing the catalog state, if we change the check > > constraint from NOT ENFORCED > > to ENFORCED, we also need to verify it in phase 3. > > that's the purpose of > > > + if (rel->rd_rel->relkind == RELKIND_RELATION && > > > + cmdcon->is_enforced && > > > + !currcon->conenforced) > > > > partitioned tables don't have storage, phase3 table scan to verify > > check constraint on partitioned table > > don't have effect. > > > > also partitioned table check constraint (name, definition > > (pg_constraint.conbin) must match with partition > > otherwise partition can be attached to the partitioned table. > > so here you don't need to consider RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE. > > > Hi! > I looked at v3. > > Should we rename `ATExecAlterConstrEnforceability` to > `ATExecAlterFKConstrEnforceability `? >
+1 Robert Treat https://xzilla.net
