Re: Can't find not null constraint, but \d+ shows that

Tender Wang <tndrwang@gmail.com>

From: Tender Wang <tndrwang@gmail.com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-04-19T06:41:26Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> 于2024年4月19日周五 02:49写道:

> On 2024-Apr-13, jian he wrote:
>
> > I wonder is there any incompatibility issue, or do we need to say
> something
> > about the new behavior when dropping a key column?
>
> Umm, yeah, maybe we should document it in ALTER TABLE DROP PRIMARY KEY
> and in the release notes to note the different behavior.
>
> > only minor cosmetic issue:
> > + if (unconstrained_cols)
> > i would like change it to
> > + if (unconstrained_cols != NIL)
> >
> > + foreach(lc, unconstrained_cols)
> > we can change to
> > + foreach_int(attnum, unconstrained_cols)
> > per commit
> >
> https://git.postgresql.org/cgit/postgresql.git/commit/?id=14dd0f27d7cd56ffae9ecdbe324965073d01a9ff
>
> Ah, yeah.  I did that, rewrote some comments and refined the tests a
> little bit to ensure the pg_upgrade behavior is sane.  I intend to get
> this pushed tomorrow, if nothing ugly comes up.
>

The new patch looks good to me.


>
> CI run: https://cirrus-ci.com/build/5471117953990656
>
>

-- 
Tender Wang
OpenPie:  https://en.openpie.com/

Commits

  1. Better handle indirect constraint drops

  2. Add macros for looping through a List without a ListCell.