Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2023 09:55:58 -0500
From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>,
	pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: cataloguing NOT NULL constraints
Message-ID: <ZDAu/lrecG7mrwbQ@telsasoft.com>
References: <ZC8NeXrN1yRH1OzS@telsasoft.com>
 <20230407021413.dolhoh47nrvlthbq@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230407021413.dolhoh47nrvlthbq@alvherre.pgsql>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ZDAu/lrecG7mrwbQ%40telsasoft.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 07, 2023 at 04:14:13AM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2023-Apr-06, Justin Pryzby wrote:

> > +ERROR:  relation "c" already exists
>
> Do you intend to make an error here ?

These still look like mistakes in the tests.

> Also, I think these table names may be too generic, and conflict with
> other parallel tests, now or in the future.
>
> > +create table d(a int not null, f1 int) inherits(inh_p3, c);
> > +ERROR:  relation "d" already exists

> Sadly, the binary-upgrade mode is a bit of a mess and thus the
> pg_upgrade test is failing.