Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: small exclusion constraints patch

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: small exclusion constraints patch
Date: 2010-05-30 14:01:46
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> writes:
> On 2010-05-30 06:55 +0300, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I've often wished for the ability to constrain a tale to hold just one
>> row, so I don't find that use case implausible at all.

> As I pointed out in
> , you
> can already do that.

Yes.  This is NOT about constraining a table to hold only one row.
It's about requiring all its rows to hold the same value (in some
column(s)), without predetermining exactly which value that will be.
I think the use-case for that is really extremely narrow.

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-05-30 14:19:06
Subject: Re: Is there anyway to get list of table name, before raw parser is analyze?
Previous:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2010-05-30 13:53:53
Subject: Re: dividing money by money

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group