On 10/10/23 15:12, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 5:07 PM David G. Johnston
> <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2. I don't think it's a good idea for the same patch to try to solve
>>> two problems unless they are so closely related that solving one
>>> without solving the other is not sensible.
>>
>> A NOT NULL constraint apparently is just a special case of a check constraint which seems closely related enough to
matchyour definition.
>
> Yes, that might be true. I suppose I'd like to hear from the patch
> author(s) about that. I'm somewhat coming around to your idea that
> maybe both should be covered together, but I'm not the one writing the
> patch.
Álvaro Herrera has put (and is still putting) immense effort into
turning NOT NULL into a CHECK constraint.
Honestly, I don't see why the two patches need to be combined.
--
Vik Fearing
