From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: cataloguing NOT NULL constraints
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2023 12:32:53 +0200
Message-ID: <20230724103253.jukb27f7fnlnamdr@alvherre.pgsql> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEZATCX8pMWYKKBaXmX5w3QfXYrxVz8XjzHoM3atHsVC9Qr_3A@mail.gmail.com>
On 2023-Jul-24, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> Hmm, I don't particularly like that approach, because I think it will
> be difficult to cram any additional details into the table, and also I
> don't know whether having multiple not null constraints for a
> particular column can be entirely ruled out.
>
> I may well be in the minority here, but I think the best way is to
> list them in a separate footer section, in the same way as CHECK
> constraints, allowing other constraint properties to be included. So
> it might look something like:
That's the first thing I proposed actually. I got one vote down from
Robert Haas[1], but while the idea seems to have had support from Justin
Pryzby (in \dt++) [2] and definitely did from Peter Eisentraut [3], I do
not like it too much myself, mainly because the partition list has a
very similar treatment and I find that one an annoyance.
> and also I don't know whether having multiple not null constraints for
> a particular column can be entirely ruled out.
I had another look at the standard. In 11.26 (<drop table
constraint definition>) it says that "If [the constraint being removed]
causes some column COL to be known not nullable and no other constraint
causes COL to be known not nullable, then the nullability characteristic
of the column descriptor of COL is changed to possibly nullable". Which
supports the idea that there might be multiple such constraints.
(However, we could also read this as meaning that the PK could be one
such constraint while NOT NULL is another one.)
However, 11.16 (<drop column not null clause> as part of 11.12 <alter
column definition>), says that DROP NOT NULL causes the indication of
the column as NOT NULL to be removed. This, to me, says that if you do
have multiple such constraints, you'd better remove them all with that
command. All in all, I lean towards allowing just one as best as we
can.
[1] https://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmobnoxt83y1QesBNVArhFm-fLwWkDUyiV84e+psayDwB7A@mail.gmail.com
[2] https://postgr.es/m/20230301223214.GC4268%40telsasoft.com
[3] https://postgr.es/m/1c4f3755-2d10-cae9-647f-91a9f006410e%40enterprisedb.com
--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
“Cuando no hay humildad las personas se degradan” (A. Christie)
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org, dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com, peter@eisentraut.org, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: cataloguing NOT NULL constraints
In-Reply-To: <20230724103253.jukb27f7fnlnamdr@alvherre.pgsql>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox