Re: Suggested TODO: allow ALTERing of typemods without heap/index rebuild - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Stark
Subject Re: Suggested TODO: allow ALTERing of typemods without heap/index rebuild
Date
Msg-id 4136ffa0906011417l6f4b1875o8f97207ca78ac592@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Suggested TODO: allow ALTERing of typemods without heap/index rebuild  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 9:49 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:
>
>
> NUMERIC(x, y) comes to mind, although that might be a more dangerous
> case. If you turn a NUMERIC(5,0) into a NUMERIC(5,1), then '1.2' may be
> stored as either '1' or '1.2' depending on whether you did the insert
> before or after the change. That's because, with NUMERIC, it's not
> really a constraint, but a rule for rounding.

Well it's not like rewriting the table is going to accomplish anything though...


> There may be other interesting cases involving constraints. For
> instance, if you have CHECK(i < 200), you should be able to add CHECK(i
> < 1000) without an exclusive lock or recheck. Then, with an exclusive
> lock, you can remove the original tighter constraint, but at least it
> wouldn't have to recheck the entire table.

We have the infrastructure for this kind of check actually, it's the
same kind of thing we do for partition exclusion...



-- 
greg


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions
Next
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions