Re: ALTER TABLE ONLY .. DROP CONSTRAINT on partitioned tables - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: ALTER TABLE ONLY .. DROP CONSTRAINT on partitioned tables
Date
Msg-id 202409301001.3nirfbzcbib3@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ALTER TABLE ONLY .. DROP CONSTRAINT on partitioned tables  (Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: ALTER TABLE ONLY .. DROP CONSTRAINT on partitioned tables
List pgsql-hackers
Hello,

On 2024-Sep-27, Amit Langote wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 2:52 AM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
> > While studying a review note from Jian He on not-null constraints, I
> > came across some behavior introduced by commit 9139aa19423b[1] that I
> > think is mistaken.

> Yeah, I don’t quite recall why I thought the behavior for both ADD and
> DROP had to be the same. I went back and reviewed the thread, trying
> to understand why DROP was included in the decision, but couldn’t find
> anything that explained it. It also doesn’t seem to be related to the
> pg_dump issue that was being discussed at the time.

Right.

> So, I think you might be right that the restriction on DROP is
> overkill, and we should consider removing it, at least in the master
> branch.

Thanks for looking!  I have pushed the removal now.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera        Breisgau, Deutschland  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
<inflex> really, I see PHP as like a strange amalgamation of C, Perl, Shell
<crab> inflex: you know that "amalgam" means "mixture with mercury",
       more or less, right?
<crab> i.e., "deadly poison"



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: Conflict Detection and Resolution
Next
From: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)"
Date:
Subject: RE: long-standing data loss bug in initial sync of logical replication