On 02/09/2016 12:30 AM, Rudolf Cardinal wrote:
Dear all,
I've been trying to implement a datetime-style field in SQL Alchemy
that, in the database backend, uses a specific ISO-8601 format (e.g.
"2013-04-30T00:26:03.000+05:00"), and is a datetime at the Python end.
The primary database engine
Not sure about other DBs, but according to pg docs [1], it's preferred to
make a unique constraint (and know that you get the index for free) versus
creating a unique index.
Knowing this for pg, you can just do unique=True and get the constraint and
the index. I realize this is a very small
On 02/09/2016 04:47 PM, Jonathan Beluch wrote:
Not sure about other DBs, but according to pg docs [1], it's preferred
to make a unique constraint (and know that you get the index for free)
versus creating a unique index.
I'm not seeing the word "preferred" in that document?It is actually
Dear Mike,
Thank you very much! That makes sense; good to know.
all the best,
Rudolf.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sqlalchemy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 6:20:30 PM UTC-5, Michael Bayer wrote:
>
> I'm not seeing the word "preferred" in that document?It is actually
> simpler from a database introspection perspective to create a UNIQUE
> INDEX alone, the UNIQUE CONSTRAINT is redundant on the Postgresql
>
