On 07/27/2011 04:14 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Jul 27, 2011, at 1:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Yeah. If we're going to allow this then we should just have a concept
of a non-inherited constraint, full stop. This might just be a matter
of removing the error thrown in ATAddCheckConstraint, but I'd be worried
about whether pg_dump will handle the case correctly, what happens when
a new child is added later, etc etc.
Is this looking at the wrong problem? The reason I've wanted to get a parent
check constraint not to fire in a child is because I'm using the parent/child
relationship for partioning. Will this be relevant if/when an independent
partitioning feature is added that does not rely on table inheritance?
Yes, I have clients using inheritance for non-partitioning purposes, and
they would love to have this.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
