On 6/15/16, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Vitaly Burovoy > <vitaly.buro...@gmail.com> wrote: >> In the initial letter[1] I posted a digest from the SQL-2011 standard >> and a conclusion as a design of a new patch. >> Now I have more free time and I'm hacking it that way. The new patch >> is at the very early stage, full of WIPs and TODOs. I hope it'll be >> ready to be shown in a month (may be two). > > I have just read both your patch and the one of Alvaro, but yours does > not touch pg_constraint in any way. Isn't that unexpected?
The consensus was reached to use CHECK constraints instead of new type of constrains. Alvaro made attempt[1] to write PoC in 2012 but it failed to apply on top of master (and after solving conflicts led to core dumps) in Jan 2016. I just rebased Alvaro's one to understand how he wanted to solve issue and to run tests and queries. After all I sent rebased working patch for anyone who wants to read it and try it without core dumps. I have not published my patch for NOT NULLs yet. Alvaro, the correct path[2] in the second message[3] of the thread. What's wrong in it (I got the source in the previous[1] thread)? [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/1343682669-sup-2...@alvh.no-ip.org [2] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/attachment/41886/catalog-notnull-2-c477e84_cleaned.patch [3] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKOSWNnXbOY4pEiwN9wePOx8J%2BB44yTj40BQ8RVo-eWkdiGDFQ%40mail.gmail.com -- Best regards, Vitaly Burovoy -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
