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? Best, David -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
