Re: cataloguing NOT NULL constraints
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Commits
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Revert structural changes to not-null constraints
- 6f8bb7c1e961 17.0 landed
-
Fix inconsistencies in error messages
- 21ac38f498b3 17.0 landed
-
Disallow direct change of NO INHERIT of not-null constraints
- d45597f72fe5 17.0 landed
-
Disallow NO INHERIT not-null constraints on partitioned tables
- 13daa33fa5a6 17.0 landed
-
Better handle indirect constraint drops
- 0cd711271d42 17.0 cited
-
Don't try to assign smart names to constraints
- d72d32f52d26 17.0 cited
-
Fix restore of not-null constraints with inheritance
- d9f686a72ee9 17.0 landed
-
ATTACH PARTITION: Don't match a PK with a UNIQUE constraint
- cee8db3f680b 17.0 landed
-
Fix propagating attnotnull in multiple inheritance
- c3709100be73 17.0 landed
-
Check stack depth in new recursive functions
- b0f7dd915bca 17.0 landed
-
Move privilege check to the right place
- ac22a9545ca9 17.0 cited
-
Update information_schema definition for not-null constraints
- 3af721794272 17.0 landed
-
Fix not-null constraint test
- d0ec2ddbe088 17.0 landed
-
Disallow changing NO INHERIT status of a not-null constraint
- 9b581c534186 17.0 cited
-
Catalog not-null constraints
- b0e96f311985 17.0 cited
-
parallel_schedule: add comment on event_trigger test dependency
- c8e43c22be27 17.0 landed
-
Revert "Catalog NOT NULL constraints" and fallout
- 9ce04b50e120 16.0 landed
-
Adjust contrib/sepgsql regression test expected outputs.
- 76c111a7f166 16.0 landed
-
Fix table name clash in recently introduced test
- 728015a47016 16.0 landed
-
Catalog NOT NULL constraints
- e056c557aef4 16.0 landed
-
Change the rules for inherited CHECK constraints to be essentially the same
- cd902b331dc4 8.4.0 cited
Attachments
- v2-0001-Acquire-locks-on-children-before-recursing.patch (text/x-diff)
On 2024-Apr-22, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > On d9f686a72~1 this script results in: > > ERROR: cannot change NO INHERIT status of inherited NOT NULL constraint "t_a_not_null" on relation "t" > > Right. Now I'm beginning to wonder if allowing ADD CONSTRAINT to mutate > a pre-existing NO INHERIT constraint into a inheritable constraint > (while accepting a constraint name in the command that we don't heed) is > really what we want. Maybe we should throw some error when the affected > constraint is the topmost one, and only accept the inheritance status > change when we're recursing. So I added a restriction that we only accept such a change when recursively adding a constraint, or during binary upgrade. This should limit the damage: you're no longer able to change an existing constraint from NO INHERIT to YES INHERIT merely by doing another ALTER TABLE ADD CONSTRAINT. One thing that has me a little nervous about this whole business is whether we're set up to error out where some child table down the hierarchy has nulls, and we add a not-null constraint to it but fail to do a verification scan. I tried a couple of cases and AFAICS it works correctly, but maybe there are other cases I haven't thought about where it doesn't. -- Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "You're _really_ hosed if the person doing the hiring doesn't understand relational systems: you end up with a whole raft of programmers, none of whom has had a Date with the clue stick." (Andrew Sullivan) https://postgr.es/m/20050809113420.GD2768@phlogiston.dyndns.org