> On a separate note. The one major remaining piece here is in
> constraints. I'm thinking what I have to check is that every
> constraint present on the parent table is present on the
> child tables. And I'm thinking I should do that by looking at
> the constraint's textual definition (consrc).
>
> This doesn't allow you to get by with a single stronger
> constraint -- you would still need the redundant looser
> constraint to satisfy the inheritance.
Yes, I think you would actually want eighter an identical, or a stronger
constraint on the child.
> But it does let you get by with constraint names that don't
> match the parent's.
>
> I'm not sure that's such a good thing, since pg_dump would
> then generate a redundant constraint when it generates the
> table. Maybe that would go if constraints got conislocal and coninh.
>
> Or maybe I should insist that a matching constraint name be
> present *and* that the source text match? That's more of a
> pain to code though.
I think in the meantime, I would check that eighter a source match
is present OR a constraint with the same name. This would allow more
flexibility and imho still enough safety checking.
Until we have (or feel a need for) check logic for "stronger constraint"
it would be the op's responsibility.
Andreas
