> On Mon, Feb 9, 2026 at 5:55 PM Cédric Villemain
> <cedric.villemain@data-bene.io> wrote:
>>
>> I have some questions/comments (no change on status, I didn't test)
>>
>> - FK are constraint triggers, does it makes sense to align
>> "ATExecAlterFKConstrEnforceability" renaming with other functions like
>> "AlterConstrTriggerDeferrability" ?
>>
>
> do you mean changing
> ATExecAlterConstrDeferrability
> to
> ATExecAlterFKConstrDeferrability
> ?
I mean to keep the ConstrTrigger part in the name, in the idea that it's
the same feature (FK are "just" specialized constraints triggers IIUC).
> If so, it makes sense and also improves readability, IMO.
> However, since only FK supports changing deferrability—and we are not
> modifying deferrability here,
> the incentive for this renaming change is kind of lower.
sure.
>> - I also wonder if it makes sense to manage NOT NULL together with
>> CHECK, like in ATAddCheckNNConstraint.... ?
>>
> See ATExecAlterConstraintInternal.
> We do not support changing enforceability of NOT NULL, since NOT NULL
> NOT ENFORCED is not supported.
> I do have a patch for NOT NULL NOT ENFORCED,
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/6029
Ah great, tks.
I'll check your CF entries instead of adding noise here (I was wondering
if already had a patch to cleanup processCASbits() in gram.y).
--
Cédric Villemain +33 6 20 30 22 52
https://www.Data-Bene.io
PostgreSQL Support, Expertise, Training, R&D
