public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chao Li <[email protected]>
To: David G. Johnston <[email protected]>
Cc: Postgres hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Amit Kapila <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: docs: clarify ALTER TABLE behavior on partitioned tables
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 10:53:43 +0800
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKFQuwZyJNBN+N5Qtcg0aG6ZpOFvQV5m=cALLgv7g3u1Sz-tZw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEoWx2=mYhCfsnHaN96Qqwq5b0GVS2YgO3zpVqPPRd_iO52wRw@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAKFQuwbWNCX1M1e9_-3P9RVGo10huPjuqdL74FJ+-a5EW791KA@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAKFQuwZ+o6La5DyK9_-L2gpeiKNvGMbR78UjocO4++JkyZaRHw@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAKFQuwabxFyFQob=RfKOV3upjxwomAzmGzSouN-h2ypuXz+dZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAKFQuwZaquUrTOhfmJ2CenwiyAHx4nORQ0kB01sL+z5pCBuLFQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEoWx2mUiCYJEBuo5D74gi7pHfNz82b54oDHjZNtrXRFDnBPOg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKFQuwbQ=L8w8jEaB8_gW-RrNv2_V-VrFYBump7__z-vh-QJWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEoWx2nwoBtWX3=UOQQpGZOuRH5vNv2PHqeFHqDPdiKGaOigiA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKFQuwZyJNBN+N5Qtcg0aG6ZpOFvQV5m=cALLgv7g3u1Sz-tZw@mail.gmail.com>



> On Jan 21, 2026, at 09:09, David G. Johnston <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 1:20 AM Chao Li <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Thanks again for your review. I have integrated all your edits to v4. Once you consider the changes are okay, can you please mark the CF entry [1] as Ready for Committer?
> 
> 
> v5 Attached with a delta.
> 
> There exists described behaviors in the notes that are being removed that need to be retained; pertaining to inheritance setups.  I put a note in place of the removals pointing out that when inheritance is being used for partitioning the rules for partitioned tables apply (implied 'unless otherwise noted') and that local/independent objects can always be addressed normally.  I then incorporated the notes into the appropriate sub-command sections.  Please give it a sanity check since I'm still getting my head around all this.
> 
> David J.
> 
> <v5-0001-docs-clarify-ALTER-TABLE-behavior-on-partitioned-.patch><v5-0002-delta.patch>

Hi David,

Thanks for your continuous review. I just checked the delta:

1 - DROP COLUMN
```
+     <para>
+      For inheritance setups, a descendant column is removed only if both: this
+      is the only parent defining the column, and the column was never independently
+      defined.
+     </para>
```

The meaning is basically correct. I dislike the statement of “only if both:”, can we rephrase like:
```
For inheritance setups, a descendant column is removed only if both of the
following are true: this is the only parent defining the column, and the column
was never independently defined in the descendant.
```

What do you think?

2 - ADD table_constain
```
+     <para>
+      For inheritance setups, the constraint is not added to child tables
+      unless it is a <literal>CHECK</literal> constraint with the (implicit)
+      <literal>INHERIT</literal> property.
+     </para>
```

The meaning is also correct. I want a slight tweak like:
```
For inheritance setups, the constraint is not added to child tables unless it is
a CHECK constraint that is inheritable (that is, not declared NO INHERIT).
```

What do you think?

3 - VALIDATE CONSTRAINT
```
-      independently of the partitioned table.
+      independently of the partitioned table, so long as the partitioned
+      table itself is not yet validated.
```

Agreed.

4 - DISABLE/ENABLE TRIGGER
```
+     <para>
+      For inheritance setups <literal>ONLY</literal> is implied, though it may
+      be specified.
+     </para>
```

Agreed.

5 - RENAME
```
-      For partitioned tables, this form behaves the same as for regular
-      tables. Renaming a partitioned table, column, or constraint does not
-      propagate to partitions.
+      When applied to a partitioned table, partition columns constraints
+      are implicitly renamed and specifying <literal>ONLY</literal> is not allowed.
+     </para>
+     <para>
+      For inheritance setups, index-based constraints are always considered
+      independent.  Dependent columns and constraints are implicitly renamed
+      and specifying <literal>ONLY</literal> is not allowed.
```

Here “specifying ONLY is not allowed” is wrong. ONLY can be specified, but has no effect. So I think we can use the statement you put to ENABLE/DISABLE TRIGGER: “ONLY is implied, though it may be specified”.

6 - Notes
```
+   <para>
+    For inheritance setups, the behavior described for partitioned tables applies
+    only to the dependent column(s) on the descendant table(s).  It is always
+    allowed to target a descendant table with column altering commands on independent
+    columns.
+   </para>
```

Agreed.

Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/










view thread (19+ messages)  latest in thread

reply
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: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: docs: clarify ALTER TABLE behavior on partitioned tables
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox