Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3864.600.51.1.1\))
Subject: Re: Fix bug of CHECK constraint enforceability recursion
From: Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <cb4a41fd-67e8-47ed-bcff-d0549dce3f02@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2026 15:46:46 +0800
Cc: jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>,
 "L. pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
 Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <33E9C4C2-B6A8-4FCC-BEEA-461EA5FB98C8@gmail.com>
References: <E74C57FA-1DD0-4C8E-8FB1-538034752592@gmail.com>
 <CACJufxGRkCSqqRwd+3MMVFbosKXHv=Jc+KyGK+NM3YAHN7eu+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <DCE683F9-CEBF-4EDE-81D1-5E59CCD5CF82@gmail.com>
 <cb4a41fd-67e8-47ed-bcff-d0549dce3f02@app.fastmail.com>
To: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro_Herrera?= <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/33E9C4C2-B6A8-4FCC-BEEA-461EA5FB98C8%40gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk


> On May 26, 2026, at 15:32, =C3=81lvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de> =
wrote:
>=20
> On 2026-05-26, Chao Li wrote:
>>> On May 26, 2026, at 14:05, jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>=20
>>> Overall, i tend to think that we should reject ALTER TABLE ALTER
>>> CONSTRAINT if it
>>> would result in the parent constraint being enforced while the child =
constraint
>>> is not enforced.
>=20
> Yeah.
>=20
>> I am not against the idea of "rejecting ALTER TABLE ALTER CONSTRAINT =
if=20
>> it would result in the parent constraint being enforced while the =
child=20
>> constrain is not enforced", but I=E2=80=99m afraid it=E2=80=99s too =
late for PG19. So,=20
>> I guess we still need to fix the issue for 19, right?
>=20
> I think this is a bug that we need to fix in 19 as well =E2=80=94 I =
mean we should reject the ALTER TABLE.
>=20
> --=20
> =C3=81lvaro Herrera

Thanks for your comment. Let me rework the patch.

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