Re: Check constraints on non-immutable keys
От | Magnus Hagander |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Check constraints on non-immutable keys |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTimhPb5wsv0gRbq9LvE9qKRr-uVD43atFHg4jkAz@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Check constraints on non-immutable keys (Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 18:33, Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com> wrote: > On 30/06/10 17:11, Robert Haas wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> >>> Robert Haas<robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >>>> >>>> My scintillating contribution to this discussion is the observation >>>> that unrestorable dumps suck. >>> >>> No doubt, but is this a real problem in practice? >> >> Magnus tells me that that was what prompted his original email. > > I've done it. Luckily only with a small and fully functioning database so I > could drop the constraint and re-dump it. > > Had a "recent_date" domain that was making sure new diary-style entries had > a plausible date. Of course, two years later my dump can no longer restore > the oldest record :-( > > IMHO The real solution would be something that could strip/rewrite the > constraint on restore rather than trying to prevent people being stupid > though. People *will* just tag their functions as immutable to get them to > work. Are you sure? The people most likely to "just tag their functions as immutable", are the same ones most unlikely to know *how to do that*. At least for what I think is the majority case - which is calling builtin functions. -- Magnus HaganderMe: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: