Michael Paquier writes:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> My feeling is that we'd keep
>> the pg_attribute.attnotnull field and continue to drive actual enforcement
>> off that, but it would just reflect a summary of the pg_constraint state.
> OK, I see. Hm, by storing this
On 6/15/16, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Vitaly Burovoy
> wrote:
>> In the initial letter[1] 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
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> > IIRC, Alvaro posted a WIP patch for that awhile back. Not sure what the
>> > current state is.
>>
>> Are you talking about that?
>> https://www.postgresql.o
Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > IIRC, Alvaro posted a WIP patch for that awhile back. Not sure what the
> > current state is.
>
> Are you talking about that?
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20110707213401.GA27098%40alvh.no-ip.org
> This is
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Vitaly Burovoy
wrote:
> In the initial letter[1] 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
On 6/15/16, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier writes:
>> To put it short, it should not be possible to drop a NOT NULL
>> constraint on a child relation when its parent table is using it, this
>> should only be possible from the parent. Attached is a patch handling
>> this problem by adding a new
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier writes:
> This doesn't sound like the right approach; in particular, it won't really
> help for deciding whether to propagate a DROP NOT NULL on a parent rel to
> its children. What we've discussed in the past is to store NOT NU
Michael Paquier writes:
> To put it short, it should not be possible to drop a NOT NULL
> constraint on a child relation when its parent table is using it, this
> should only be possible from the parent. Attached is a patch handling
> this problem by adding a new function in pg_inherits.c to fetch
Hi all,
A couple of months back the $subject has been mentioned, though nobody
actually wrote a patch to prevent that:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/21633.1448383...@sss.pgh.pa.us
So here is one..
To put it short, it should not be possible to drop a NOT NULL
constraint on a child relation
