| From: | Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)myrealbox(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Garamond <lists(at)zara(dot)6(dot)isreserved(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Unique Index |
| Date: | 2005-01-20 07:32:37 |
| Message-ID: | 758D10FE-6AB5-11D9-A069-000A95C88220@myrealbox.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Jan 20, 2005, at 16:03, David Garamond wrote:
> Dann Corbit wrote:
>> True, but the standard says nothing about the creation of an index, so
>> you can make it behave in any way that you see fit.
>
> But I thought we are talking about unique _constraint_ here (which is
> certainly regulated by the standard).
They could conceivably be separated. The standard likewise doesn't say
anything about how the unique constraint is enforced. In PostgreSQL, a
"unique" index is used to enforce the constraint, but the unique index
is not intrinsically tied to the unique constraint.
Michael Glaesemann
grzm myrealbox com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vincent Hikida | 2005-01-20 07:33:19 | Re: Unique Index |
| Previous Message | Thomas F.O'Connell | 2005-01-20 07:20:16 | Re: PL/PgSQL Index Usage with Trigger Variables |