From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, KES <kes-kes(at)yandex(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Typo in doc or wrong EXCLUDE implementation |
Date: | 2018-08-09 20:15:08 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwYCGDrazjV0ME_X81nchdj+b0WSJNwNQnNqYrThVUA41Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 12:31 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I think the OP is reading "equivalent" literally, as meaning that
> an EXCLUDE with operators that act like equality is treated as being
> the same as UNIQUE for *every* purpose. We're not going there, IMO,
> so probably we need to tweak the doc wording a little. Perhaps
> writing "functionally equivalent" would be better? Or instead of
> "is equivalent to", write "imposes the same restriction as"?
>
Maybe something like:
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_table.sgml
b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_table.sgml
index d936de3f23..7c31fe853b 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_table.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_table.sgml
@@ -928,12 +928,10 @@ WITH ( MODULUS <replaceable
class="parameter">numeric_literal</replaceable>, REM
The <literal>EXCLUDE</literal> clause defines an exclusion
constraint, which guarantees that if
any two rows are compared on the specified column(s) or
- expression(s) using the specified operator(s), not all of these
- comparisons will return <literal>TRUE</literal>. If all of the
- specified operators test for equality, this is equivalent to a
- <literal>UNIQUE</literal> constraint, although an ordinary unique
constraint
- will be faster. However, exclusion constraints can specify
- constraints that are more general than simple equality.
+ expression(s) using the specified operator(s), at least one of the
+ comparisons will return <literal>FALSE<literal/>.
+ Exclusion constraints can (and should) be used to specify
+ expressions that do not involve simple equality.
For example, you can specify a constraint that
no two rows in the table contain overlapping circles
(see <xref linkend="datatype-geometric"/>) by using the
@@ -968,6 +966,14 @@ WITH ( MODULUS <replaceable
class="parameter">numeric_literal</replaceable>, REM
exclusion constraint on a subset of the table; internally this
creates a
partial index. Note that parentheses are required around the
predicate.
</para>
+
+ <para>
+ <productname>PostgreSQL</productname> does not consider an exclusion
+ constraint to be a valid unique constraint for purposes of
determining the
+ validity of a foreign key constraint. For this reason, in addition
to performance,
+ an exclusion constraint defined using only equality operators should
be defined
+ as a <literal>UNIQUE<literal/> constraint.
+ </para>
</listitem>
</varlistentry>
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
create-table-exclude-doc.diff | application/octet-stream | 2.0 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Vik Fearing | 2018-08-09 21:35:56 | Re: Typo in doc or wrong EXCLUDE implementation |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-08-09 19:31:09 | Re: Typo in doc or wrong EXCLUDE implementation |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-08-09 20:21:25 | Re: Doc patch: add RECURSIVE to bookindex |
Previous Message | David Kohn | 2018-08-09 20:01:09 | Re: POC for a function trust mechanism |