On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
>> Excerpts from Nikhil Sontakke's message of mié abr 11 15:07:45 -0300 2012:
>>> This patch removes the support for :
>>>
>>> ALTER TABLE ONLY constraint_rename_test ADD CONSTRAINT con2 CHECK (b > 0);
>>>
>>> and uses
>>>
>>> ALTER TABLE constraint_rename_test ADD CONSTRAINT con2 CHECK ONLY (b > 0);
>>>
>>> I know it's a bit late in the commitfest, but if this patch makes this
>>> feature more "complete", maybe we should consider...
>
>> Personally I don't think we should consider this for 9.2.
>
> Well, if we're going to regret having offered the other syntax, now
> would be the time to figure that out, before we ship it not after.
> I would go so far as to say that if we don't accept this for 9.2
> we probably shouldn't accept it at all, because two different ways
> to spell the same thing isn't nice.
+1 for fixing up the syntax before 9.2 goes out the door. I think the
original syntax was misguided to begin with.
CHECK NO INHERIT sounds fine to me; will that display ALTER TABLE ONLY
x as the one true way of doing this?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
