On 2024-Dec-03, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> The handling of merging check constraints seems incomplete. What
> should be the behavior of this:
>
> => create table p1 (a int check (a > 0) not enforced);
> CREATE TABLE
> => create table c1 (a int check (a > 0) enforced) inherits (p1);
> CREATE TABLE
Hmm. Because the constraints are unnamed, and the chosen names are
different, I don't think they should be merged; I tried with 0001 in
place, and I think it does the right thing. If c1's creation specifies
a name that matches the parent name, we get this:
55432 18devel 61349=# create table c1 (a int constraint p1_a_check check (a > 0)) inherits (p1);
NOTICE: merging column "a" with inherited definition
ERROR: constraint "p1_a_check" conflicts with NOT VALID constraint on relation "c1"
I think this is bogus on two counts. First, NOT VALID has nowhere been
specified, so the error shouldn't be about that. But second, the child
should have the constraint marked as enforced as requested, and marked
as conislocal=t, coninhcount=1; the user can turn it into NOT ENFORCED
if they want, and no expectation breaks, because the parent is also
already marked NOT ENFORCED.
The other way around shall not be accepted: if the parent has it as
ENFORCED, then the child is not allowed to have it as NOT ENFORCED,
neither during creation nor during ALTER TABLE. The only way to mark
c1's constraint as NOT ENFORCED is to mark p1's constraint as NOINHERIT,
so that c1's constraint's inhcount becomes 0. Then, the constraint has
no parent with an enforced constraint, so it's okay to mark it as not
enforced.
> Or this?
>
> => create table p2 (a int check (a > 0) enforced);
> CREATE TABLE
> => create table c2 () inherits (p1, p2);
> CREATE TABLE
>
> Should we catch these and error?
Here we end up with constraints p1_a_check and p2_a_check, which have
identical definitions except the NOT ENFORCED bits differ. I think this
is okay, since we don't attempt to match these constraints when the
names differ. If both parents had the constraint with the same name, we
should try to consider them as one and merge them. In that case, c2's
constraint inhcount should be 2, and at least one of the parent
constraints is marked enforced, so the child shall have it as enforce
also. Trying to mark c2's constraint as NOT ENFORCED shall give an
error because it inherits from p2. But if you deinherit from p2, or
mark the constraint in p2 as NOINHERIT, then c2's constraint can become
NOT ENFORCE if the user asks for it.
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
