On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Alex Hunsaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > create table junk (val integer not null, val2 integer); > > create table junk_child () inherits (junk_1); > > alter table junk_child alter column val drop not null; > > insert into junk_child (val2) values (1); > > > pg_dump -t junk -t junk_child > > > pg_restore/psql will fail because junk_child.val now has a not null > > constraint > > Actually the bug is that ALTER TABLE allows you to do that. It should > not be possible to drop an inherited constraint, but right now there's > not enough information in the system catalogs to detect the situation. > Fixing this has been on the TODO list for awhile: > > o %Prevent child tables from altering or dropping constraints > like CHECK that were inherited from the parent table > > regards, tom lane >
Hrm how about something like the attached patch? It only handles set not null/drop not null. And I thought about making it so set default behaved the same way, but i can see how that can be useful in the real world. Thoughts? Arguably pg_dump should just do something similar to what it does for set default (because that dumps correctly)... I only say that because there specific regressions test for the behavior I outlined above. Which is now "broken" with my patch. Be gentle... its my first dive into postgresql guts...
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your Subscription: http://mail.postgresql.org/mj/mj_wwwusr?domain=postgresql.org&extra=pgsql-patches