Re: operator exclusion constraints [was: generalized index constraints]

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: operator exclusion constraints [was: generalized index constraints]
Date: 2009-09-20 02:23:13
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 04:40:19PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 18:35 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I'm still acutely uncomfortable with using CONSTRAINT syntax for this.
> > It is not a constraint per standard, because it's not going to be
> > displayable in information_schema. Furthermore, by extending
> > standardized syntax you run the risk of being blindsided by future
> > additions to the standard.
> Ok.

It just occurred to me that SQL:2008 ASSERTION might already fit this
feature. :)

David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres:

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Petr Jelinek 2009-09-20 02:39:22 Re: Anonymous code blocks
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-09-20 02:12:40 Re: Anonymous code blocks