Re: cataloguing NOT NULL constraints

Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com>

From: Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2023-07-25T17:32:56Z
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

On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 at 12:24, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
wrote:

> On 2023-Jul-25, Isaac Morland wrote:
>
> > I agree. I definitely do *not* want a bunch of NOT NULL constraint names
> > cluttering up displays. Can we legislate that all NOT NULL implementing
> > constraints are named by mashing together the table name, column name,
> and
> > something to identify it as a NOT NULL constraint?
>
> All constraints are named like that already, and NOT NULL constraints
> just inherited the same idea.  The names are <table>_<column>_not_null
> for NOT NULL constraints.  pg_dump goes great lengths to avoid printing
> constraint names when they have this pattern.
>

OK, this is helpful. Can \d do the same thing? I use a lot of NOT NULL
constraints and I very seriously do not want \d (including \d+) to have an
extra line for almost every column. It's just noise, and while my screen is
large, it's still not infinite.

I do not want these constraint names cluttering the output either.
> That's why I propose moving them to a new \d++ command, where they will
> only bother you if you absolutely need them.  But so far I have only one
> vote supporting that idea.


My suggestion is for \d+ to show NOT NULL constraints only if there is
something weird going on (wrong name, duplicate constraints, …). If there
is nothing weird about the constraint then explicitly listing it provides
absolutely no information that is not given by "not null" in the "Nullable"
column. Easier said than done I suppose. I'm just worried about my \d+
displays becoming less useful.