Hi Alex,
I didn't care for the changes to gram.y so I reworked it a bit so we
now pass is_only to AddRelationNewConstraint() (like we do with
is_local). Seemed simpler but maybe I missed something. Comments?
Hmmm, your patch checks for a constraint being "only" via:
!recurse && !recursing
I hope that is good enough to conclusively conclude that the constraint is 'only'. This check was not too readable in the existing code for me anyways ;). If we check at the grammar level, we can be sure. But I remember not being too comfortable about the right position to ascertain this characteristic.
I also moved the is_only check in AtAddCheckConstraint() to before we
grab and loop through any children. Seemed a bit wasteful to loop
through the new constraints just to set a flag so that we could bail
out while looping through the children.
Ditto comment for this function. I thought this function went to great lengths to spit out a proper error in case of inconsistencies between parent and child. But if your check makes it simpler, that's good!
You also forgot to bump Natts_pg_constraint.
Ouch. Thanks for the catch.
PFA the above changes as well as being "rebased" against master.
Thanks Alex, appreciate the review!
Regards,
Nikhils
