Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint
От | Darren Duncan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5110D35F.7040103@darrenduncan.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint (Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreak@officenet.no>) |
Ответы |
Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint
Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint |
Список | pgsql-general |
Deferrable foreign key and unique key constraints I can understand, but ... On 2013.02.05 1:22 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote: > +100 for having NOT NULL and CHECK-constraints deferrable:-) > Is there any "I want to sponsor development of <feature-X> with $xxx" mechanism? I'd like to know what value there is in making NOT NULL and CHECK deferrable. While we're at it, do we want to make the column data type check constraints deferrable too, so you can initially assign any value at all without regard for the declared type of the column? Then we only at constraints-immediate time say, sorry, you can't put a string in a number column, or, sorry, that number is too large, or that string is too long, or whatever. NOT NULL and CHECK constraints are effectively just part of a data type definition after all. Postgres' current behavior is fairly consistent; if we make these deferrable, then why stop there? -- Darren Duncan
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: