On 2015-02-20 19:06:50 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2015-02-15 12:54:45 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > > > BTW, the precedent of PG_USED_FOR_ASSERTS_ONLY would suggest calling > > > this one PG_FORCE_NOT_NULL, or at least using underscores for word > > > breaks in whatever we end up calling it. > > > > I've named it BKI_FORCE_(NOT_)?NULL. > > > > So, I've implemented this - turned out to be a bit more work than I'd > > expected... I had to whack around the representation Catalog.pm returns > > for columns, but I think the new representation for columns is better > > anyway. Doesn't look too bad. > > Just gave it a quick read, I think it's good. +1 for your > implementation.
Unless somebody protests I'm going to push this soon. > > I've also added BKI_FORCE_NULL as you mentioned it as being possibly > > useful, was easy enough. I haven't identified a user so far though, so > > we could just remove it if we want. > > I think we should just save this part of the patch until some use turns up. I pondered this for a while and I don't agree. If the flag had been available a couple column that now use 0 instead of NULLs and such would have been NULLable. And since it's very few lines I'm inclined to keep it, it's really cheap enough. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
