Re: Is this a bug? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Subject Re: Is this a bug?
Date
Msg-id CAFcNs+ou5XaF7YrsQxarA5-x_CQi_xxsvxni1M0dkgOqmS61Ew@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Is this a bug?  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: Is this a bug?  (Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>)
Re: Is this a bug?  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Re: Is this a bug?  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br />On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Bruce Momjian <<a
href="mailto:bruce@momjian.us">bruce@momjian.us</a>>wrote:<br />><br />> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 10:04:50PM
-0400,Bruce Momjian wrote:<br />> > On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 03:12:47PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:<br />> >
>On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 2:33 PM, Bruce Momjian <<a href="mailto:bruce@momjian.us">bruce@momjian.us</a>>
wrote:<br/>> > > >> Yes, you remember well.  I will have to find a different way for<br />> > >
>>pg_upgrade to call a no-op ALTER TABLE, which is fine.<br />> > > ><br />> > > >
Lookingat the ALTER TABLE options, I am going to put this check in a<br />> > > > !IsBinaryUpgrade block so
pg_upgradecan still use its trick.<br />> > ><br />> > > -1, that's really ugly.<br />> >
><br/>> > > Maybe the right solution is to add a form of ALTER TABLE that is<br />> > >
specificallydefined to do only this check.  This is an ongoing need,<br />> > > so that might not be out of
line.<br/>> ><br />> > Ah, seems ALTER TABLE ... DROP CONSTRAINT IF EXISTS also works --- I<br />> >
willuse that.<br />><br />> OK, attached patch applied, with pg_upgrade adjustments.  I didn't<br />> think
theoriginal regression tests for this were necessary.<br />><br /></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br />Hi,<br /><br
/></div><divclass="gmail_extra">Why this patch was reverted one day after applied [1]? I didn't see any discussion
aroundit.<br /></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br /></div><div class="gmail_extra">Regards,<br /><br /></div><div
class="gmail_extra">[1]<a
href="http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=6cb74a67e26523eb2408f441bfc589c80f76c465">http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=6cb74a67e26523eb2408f441bfc589c80f76c465</a><br
/><br/>--<br />Fabrízio de Royes Mello<br />Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL<br />>> Timbira: <a
href="http://www.timbira.com.br">http://www.timbira.com.br</a><br/>>> Blog: <a
href="http://fabriziomello.github.io">http://fabriziomello.github.io</a><br/>>> Linkedin: <a
href="http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello">http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello</a><br/>>> Twitter: <a
href="http://twitter.com/fabriziomello">http://twitter.com/fabriziomello</a><br/>>> Github: <a
href="http://github.com/fabriziomello">http://github.com/fabriziomello</a></div></div>

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: 9.5 release notes
Next
From: Thom Brown
Date:
Subject: Re: Is this a bug?