Horton

Re: cataloguing NOT NULL constraints

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>

View thread
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>, Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2024-02-05T18:11:18Z
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 →

  1. Revert structural changes to not-null constraints

  2. Fix inconsistencies in error messages

  3. Disallow direct change of NO INHERIT of not-null constraints

  4. Disallow NO INHERIT not-null constraints on partitioned tables

  5. Better handle indirect constraint drops

  6. Don't try to assign smart names to constraints

  7. Fix restore of not-null constraints with inheritance

  8. ATTACH PARTITION: Don't match a PK with a UNIQUE constraint

  9. Fix propagating attnotnull in multiple inheritance

  10. Check stack depth in new recursive functions

  11. Move privilege check to the right place

  12. Update information_schema definition for not-null constraints

  13. Fix not-null constraint test

  14. Disallow changing NO INHERIT status of a not-null constraint

  15. Catalog not-null constraints

  16. parallel_schedule: add comment on event_trigger test dependency

  17. Revert "Catalog NOT NULL constraints" and fallout

  18. Adjust contrib/sepgsql regression test expected outputs.

  19. Fix table name clash in recently introduced test

  20. Catalog NOT NULL constraints

  21. Change the rules for inherited CHECK constraints to be essentially the same

Attachments

On 2024-Feb-05, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> While playing with it I noticed this other behavior change from 16,
> 
> create table pa (a int primary key) partition by list (a);
> create table pe (a int unique);
> alter table pa attach partition pe for values in (1, null);
> 
> In 16, we get the error:
> ERROR:  column "a" in child table must be marked NOT NULL
> which is correct (because the PK requires not-null).  In master we just
> let that through, but that seems to be a separate bug.

Hmm, so my initial reaction was to make the constraint-matching code
ignore the constraint in the partition-to-be if it's not the same type
(this is what patch 0002 here does) ... but what ends up happening is
that we create a separate, identical constraint+index for the primary
key.  I don't like that behavior too much myself, as it seems too
magical and surprising, since it could cause the ALTER TABLE ATTACH
operation of a large partition become costly and slower, since it needs
to create an index instead of merely scanning the whole data.

I'll look again at the idea of raising an error if the not-null
constraint is not already present.  That seems safer (and also, it's
what we've been doing all along).

-- 
Álvaro Herrera         PostgreSQL Developer  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/