Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 15:22:00 -0300
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Cc: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>,
	pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE .. DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY
Message-ID: <20210321182200.GA3837@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20210321181420.GC11765@telsasoft.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20210321182200.GA3837%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk

On 2021-Mar-21, Justin Pryzby wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 03:01:15PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > But note that it doesn't check if an existing constraint "implies" the new
> > > constraint - maybe it should.
> > 
> > Hm, I'm not sure I want to do that, because that means that if I later
> > have to attach the partition again with the same partition bounds, then
> > I might have to incur a scan to recheck the constraint.  I think we want
> > to make the new constraint be as tight as possible ...
> 
> The ATTACH PARTITION checks if any existing constraint impilies the (proposed)
> partition bounds, not just if constraints are equal.  So I'm suggesting to do
> the same here.

So if we do that on DETACH, what would happen on ATTACH?

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                            39°49'30"S 73°17'W