Re: ENABLE/DISABLE CONSTRAINT NAME
От | wangshuo@highgo.com.cn |
---|---|
Тема | Re: ENABLE/DISABLE CONSTRAINT NAME |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6959ea807ca0c9b5f774c4573e231352@highgo.com.cn обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: ENABLE/DISABLE CONSTRAINT NAME (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: ENABLE/DISABLE CONSTRAINT NAME
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
于 2013-09-09 20:54, Peter Eisentraut 回复: > On 9/3/13 3:13 AM, wangshuo@highgo.com.cn wrote: >> Drop/build and disable/enable constraint has no fundamental >> difference, >> and could achieve the same purpose.What I do also more convenient >> for >> the user. >> Recording the disabled constraints is easier than recoding all the >> constrains. > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Note that other schema objects can depend on the existence of > constraints. For example, the validity of a view might depend on the > existence of a primary key constraint. What would you do with the > view > if the primary key constraint is temporarily disabled? > Thanks for your reply. I could't clearly understand your opinion, could you give me more information or example? >> What's more, a lot of people ever asked about turing off constraint >> and >> The sql2008 support this.So I think it's necessary in some ways. > > I don't see this in the SQL standard. There is [NOT] ENFORCED, but > that's something different. Implementing that instead might actually > address the above concern. You are right. I had checked the SQL standard. There is not ENABLE/DISABLE. Sorry. I misunderstood the former discussion about the constraint and the SQL standard. Thanks ,again. Wang Shuo HighGo Software Co.,Ltd. September 11, 2013
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: