On 15 June 2011 07:09, Jaime Casanova <ja...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Alvaro Herrera > <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: >> Excerpts from Alvaro Herrera's message of lun jun 13 18:08:12 -0400 2011: >>> Excerpts from Dean Rasheed's message of sáb jun 11 09:32:15 -0400 2011: >> >>> > I think that you also need to update the constraint exclusion code >>> > (get_relation_constraints() or nearby), otherwise the planner might >>> > exclude a relation on the basis of a CHECK constraint that is not >>> > currently VALID. >>> >>> Ouch, yeah, thanks for pointing that out. Fortunately the patch to fix >>> this is quite simple. I don't have it handy right now but I'll post it >>> soon. >> >> Here's the complete patch. >> > > psql \h says (among other things) for ALTER TABLE > """ > ADD table_constraint > ADD table_constraint_using_index > ADD table_constraint [ NOT VALID ] > """ > > ADD table_constraint appears twice and isn't true that all > table_constraint accept the NOT VALID syntax... maybe we can accpet > the syntax and send an unimplemented feature message for the other > table_constraints? >
Yeah, I was just about to make the same observation about the 9.1beta docs. The 3rd line makes the 1st one redundant. Regards, Dean -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
