Re: NOT ENFORCED constraint feature
Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
To: Amul Sul <sulamul@gmail.com>
Cc: jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>,
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
Joel Jacobson <joel@compiler.org>
Date: 2025-01-28T16:17:07Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Add support for NOT ENFORCED in foreign key constraints
- eec0040c4bcd 18.0 landed
-
Expand test a bit
- 5d5f415816a6 18.0 landed
-
refactor: Pass relation OID instead of Relation to createForeignKeyCheckTriggers()
- ef7a5af77d44 18.0 landed
-
refactor: Split ATExecAlterConstraintInternal()
- 639238b978fe 18.0 landed
-
refactor: Move some code that updates pg_constraint to a separate function
- a3280e2a494f 18.0 landed
-
Move RemoveInheritedConstraint() call slightly earlier
- dabccf45139a 18.0 landed
-
refactor: Split tryAttachPartitionForeignKey()
- 1d26c2d2c4b8 18.0 landed
-
refactor: re-add ATExecAlterChildConstr()
- 64224a834ce4 18.0 landed
-
Add ATAlterConstraint struct for ALTER .. CONSTRAINT
- 80d7f990496b 18.0 landed
-
refactor: split ATExecAlterConstrRecurse()
- 7a947ed25b54 18.0 landed
-
Add support for NOT ENFORCED in CHECK constraints
- ca87c415e2fc 18.0 landed
On 28.01.25 11:58, Amul Sul wrote: >> This behavior is not correct: >> >> +-- Changing it back to ENFORCED will leave the constraint in the NOT >> VALID state >> +ALTER TABLE FKTABLE ALTER CONSTRAINT fktable_ftest1_fkey ENFORCED; >> +-- Which needs to be explicitly validated. >> +ALTER TABLE FKTABLE VALIDATE CONSTRAINT fktable_ftest1_fkey; >> >> Setting the constraint to enforced should enforce it immediately. This >> SQL statement is covered by the SQL standard. Also, I think it's a >> better user experience if you don't require two steps. >> > Let me clarify: the constraint will be enforced for new inserts and > updates, but it won't be validated against existing data, so those > will remain marked as invalid. Yes, I understand, but that is the not the correct behavior of this command per SQL standard.