Re: Constraint documentation
От | Patrick Francelle |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Constraint documentation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | cda2f7e2-cc6d-1504-9ede-5af88cbf4335@francelle.name обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Constraint documentation ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Constraint documentation
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Thanks for your remarks and advices, and of course for your help to rewrite the text. So, it is now included in the new version attached. I hope it will be ok this time. Patrick Francelle On 10/30/18 17:14, David G. Johnston wrote: > The product name, when used in the documentation, is "PostgreSQL" with > appropriate html elements surrounding it. > > Some parts that look or read oddly to me: > "you may expect troubles" > Use - if possible - (commas, not hypens, are customary here) > "does not currently" - drop "currently", it doesn't and we don't need > to predict the future (same goes for "are currently meant") > "therefore we recommend to avoid them" - they are unsupported, the > implied recommended is to not use them period, not avoid them if > possible. Better to say that it isn't enforced even though it is > unsupported. > > An alternative to consider as one the whole the reading of the v4 > patch just feels off and different than the rest of that section of > the documentation. > > PostgreSQL does not support writing CHECK constraints that reference > tables (though it does not reliably prevent one from doing so). While > normal operations are likely to succeed even if you violate this rule > it is probable that a database restoration will fail. Use FOREIGN KEY > constraints or custom triggers for cross-table validations. For rows > on the same table you should use UNIQUE or EXCLUDE constraints when > applicable, or a custom trigger otherwise. > > David J. >
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: