| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: CHECK NO INHERIT syntax |
| Date: | 2012-07-20 00:05:41 |
| Message-ID: | 19361.1342742741@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:49:37AM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> But we already have a different syntax for attaching attributes to
>> constraints (NOT DEFERRABLE, NOT VALID, etc.), so it would make more
>> sense to have
>>
>> CHECK (foo > 0) NO INHERIT
> How about this?
> CHECK (foo > 0) (INHERIT FALSE)
The SQL spec already says what the syntax is for options attached to
constraints, and that's not it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2012-07-20 02:27:27 | Re: 2GB limit for temp_file_limit on 32bit platform |
| Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2012-07-20 00:05:36 | pgbench -i order of vacuum |