Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint
От | Andreas Joseph Krogh |
---|---|
Тема | Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint |
Дата | |
Msg-id | OrigoEmail.167.9af1b1f2672e0079.13ca9c371d2@prod2.officenet.no обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint (Darren Duncan <darren@darrenduncan.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint
Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint |
Список | pgsql-general |
P=C3=A5 tirsdag 05. februar 2013 kl. 10:39:43, skrev Darren Duncan <= ;darren@darren= duncan.net>: <blockquote style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt= 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Def= errable 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 deferrabl= e. While we're at it, do we want to make the column data type check constraint= s deferrable too, so you can initially assign any value at all without regard= for the declared type of the column?=C2=A0 Then we only at constraints-immediat= e time say, sorry, you can't put a string in a number column, or, sorry, that numb= er 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.=C2=A0 Postgres' current behavior is fairly consistent= ; if we make these deferrable, then why stop there? =C2=A0 The value of having NOT NULL deferrable is, well, to not check for NUL= L until the tx commits. When working with ORMs this often is the case, espe= cially with circular FKs. =C2=A0 -- Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreak@officenet.no>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 mob: = +47 909 56 963 Senior Software Developer / CTO - OfficeNet AS - http://www.officenet.no Public key: http://home.officenet.no/~andreak/public_key.asc =C2=A0=
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: