public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Zsolt Parragi <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Fix bug of CHECK constraint enforceability recursion
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2026 11:44:51 -0700
Message-ID: <CAN4CZFPkeF+=sk9KxxncuzGb-Q2NsMG4zoUgff-TiHeEdzwU+w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<CACJufxGRkCSqqRwd+3MMVFbosKXHv=Jc+KyGK+NM3YAHN7eu+g@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CACJufxGxY=1mxcNz8-bjp6R+ZoCRE3O7DYt2ZqObv-Le+aMOqw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CACJufxFwJH5K1jgL1ryckYX8gxp1sfqz_2ypey1sYtWZ5u45oQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CACJufxHbVuY683j3DHEU4LSswo8DTzLJbTvhv2Uj6gqN8pJs7Q@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CACJufxGgSKFGWja=JPv3-zq3whON5cESLp7Z5=OsYvZOaRGnGw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAN4CZFOOhDAWdnY1OXB1wfG_=C4g_dw0gC2HCApz_3F7EFpqJA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAN4CZFNjnR-7hPBO=v=9h4CdDogUueYoPqpPvR9k3X5Z9-=+TA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
> * It is common for a partitioned table to have thousands of partitions, but I rarely hear of a regular inherited table having thousands of descendants.
Yes, that's why I also wasn't sure if it's needed or not, I can
construct scenarios where alters take a relatively long time, but
those do not seem to be realistic at all... so maybe it's an
acceptable limitation as you said.
> BTW, do you have any comments on the doc changes in 0002 and 0003?
+ (check and not-null constraints) down the inheritance hierarchy. With
+ multiple inheritance, if a column or constraint is inherited from more
+ than one parent, the stricter definition applies.
The documentation changes generally look good to me, but should this
statement be part of the alter table description? There's a paragraph
about merge rules above which might be a better fit for it.
("Inheritable check constraints and not-null constraints are merged in
a similar fashion")
view thread (32+ 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]
Subject: Re: Fix bug of CHECK constraint enforceability recursion
In-Reply-To: <CAN4CZFPkeF+=sk9KxxncuzGb-Q2NsMG4zoUgff-TiHeEdzwU+w@mail.gmail.com>
* 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