On 6/15/16, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Vitaly Burovoy > <vitaly.buro...@gmail.com> wrote: >> In the initial letter I posted a digest from the SQL-2011 standard >> and a conclusion as a design of a new patch. >> Now I have more free time and I'm hacking it that way. The new patch >> is at the very early stage, full of WIPs and TODOs. I hope it'll be >> ready to be shown in a month (may be two). > > I have just read both your patch and the one of Alvaro, but yours does > not touch pg_constraint in any way. Isn't that unexpected?
The consensus was reached to use CHECK constraints instead of new type of constrains. Alvaro made attempt to write PoC in 2012 but it failed to apply on top of master (and after solving conflicts led to core dumps) in Jan 2016. I just rebased Alvaro's one to understand how he wanted to solve issue and to run tests and queries. After all I sent rebased working patch for anyone who wants to read it and try it without core dumps. I have not published my patch for NOT NULLs yet. Alvaro, the correct path in the second message of the thread. What's wrong in it (I got the source in the previous thread)?  https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/1343682669-sup-2...@alvh.no-ip.org  https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/attachment/41886/catalog-notnull-2-c477e84_cleaned.patch  https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKOSWNnXbOY4pEiwN9wePOx8J%2BB44yTj40BQ8RVo-eWkdiGDFQ%40mail.gmail.com -- Best regards, Vitaly Burovoy -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers