Re: Mutable CHECK constraints?
От | Laurenz Albe |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Mutable CHECK constraints? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | f4495237cb3e6bf79aeef43bcf8d371394d2d201.camel@cybertec.at обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Mutable CHECK constraints? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2023-01-24 at 01:38 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes: > > We throw an error if the expression in a CREATE INDEX statement is not IMMUTABLE. > > But while the documentation notes that expressions in CHECK constraints are not > > to be immutable, we don't enforce that. Why don't we call something like > > CheckMutability inside cookConstraint? Sure, that wouldn't catch all abuse, > > but it would be better than nothing. > > > There is of course the worry of breaking upgrade for unsafe constraints, but is > > there any other reason not to enforce immutability? > > Yeah, that's exactly it, it's a historical exemption for compatibility > reasons. There are discussions about this in the archives, if memory > serves ... but I'm too tired to go digging. Thanks for the answer. A search turned up https://postgr.es/m/AANLkTikwFfvavEX9nDwcRD4_xJb_VAitMeP1IH4wpGIt%40mail.gmail.com Yours, Laurenz Albe
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: