On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 12:10 AM, Nikhil Sontakke <nikkhils(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> >> It appears that the only way to create a non-inherited CHECK constraint
>> >> is using ALTER TABLE. Is there no support in CREATE TABLE planned?
>> >> That looks a bit odd.
>> > There are no plans to do that AFAIR, though maybe you could convince
>> > Nikhil to write the patch to do so.
>> That certainly doesn't meet the principle of least surprise... CREATE
>> TABLE should support this.
> Well, the above was thought about during the original discussion and
> eventually we felt that CREATE TABLE already has other issues as well, so
> not having this done as part of creating a table was considered acceptable
> But, let me have a stab at it when I get some free cycles.
I agree with Peter that we should have we should have CHECK ONLY.
ONLY is really a property of the constraint, not the ALTER TABLE
command -- if it were otherwise, we wouldn't need to store it the
system catalogs, but of course we do. The fact that it's not a
standard property isn't a reason not to have proper syntax for it.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Gražvydas Valeika||Date: 2012-01-18 23:25:02|
|Subject: Strange primary key constraint influence to grouping|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2012-01-18 23:12:40|
|Subject: Re: Should I implement DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY?|