Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: ALTER TABLE ... ADD FOREIGN KEY ... NOT ENFORCED

2011-01-23 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 14:45 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs writes: > > On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 20:33 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: > >> \d table now only shows that there's a FOREIGN KEY, which might lead the > >> user to think that there should not be any values that don't exist in > >> the

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: ALTER TABLE ... ADD FOREIGN KEY ... NOT ENFORCED

2011-01-23 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs writes: > On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 20:33 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: >> \d table now only shows that there's a FOREIGN KEY, which might lead the >> user to think that there should not be any values that don't exist in >> the referenced table. > Neither \d nor \di shows invalid indexes

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: ALTER TABLE ... ADD FOREIGN KEY ... NOT ENFORCED

2011-01-23 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 20:56 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: > On 1/23/2011 8:43 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 20:33 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: > >> On 1/23/2011 8:23 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > >>> On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 19:50 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: > Another problem I foun

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: ALTER TABLE ... ADD FOREIGN KEY ... NOT ENFORCED

2011-01-23 Thread Marko Tiikkaja
On 1/23/2011 8:43 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 20:33 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: On 1/23/2011 8:23 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 19:50 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: Another problem I found is that psql doesn't indicate in any way that a FOREIGN KEY constraint is

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: ALTER TABLE ... ADD FOREIGN KEY ... NOT ENFORCED

2011-01-23 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 20:33 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: > On 1/23/2011 8:23 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 19:50 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: > >> Another problem I found is that psql doesn't indicate in any way that a > >> FOREIGN KEY constraint is not validated yet. > > > > Sho

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: ALTER TABLE ... ADD FOREIGN KEY ... NOT ENFORCED

2011-01-23 Thread Marko Tiikkaja
On 1/23/2011 8:23 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 19:50 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: Another problem I found is that psql doesn't indicate in any way that a FOREIGN KEY constraint is not validated yet. Should it? What command do you think needs changing? \d table now only shows

Re: [HACKERS] REVIEW: ALTER TABLE ... ADD FOREIGN KEY ... NOT ENFORCED

2011-01-23 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 19:50 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On 1/14/2011 1:15 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > > Patch to implement the proposed feature attached, for CFJan2011. > > Overall, I think the patch looks good Thanks for the review. > , but I found some problems with > it. In t

[HACKERS] REVIEW: ALTER TABLE ... ADD FOREIGN KEY ... NOT ENFORCED

2011-01-23 Thread Marko Tiikkaja
Hi Simon, On 1/14/2011 1:15 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: Patch to implement the proposed feature attached, for CFJan2011. Overall, I think the patch looks good, but I found some problems with it. In tablecmds.c you have: + if (found && con->contype == CONSTR_FOREIGN && !con->convalidated)