Monty Taylor wrote:
Brian Aker wrote:
Hi!
On Dec 17, 2008, at 12:50 AM, Roy Lyseng wrote:
IMHO, the data type should not implicitly define any insert/update
semantics around it, unless it makes no sense to support user-level
operations (which may be the case for UUID?).
Having a column which is UUID that generates one as default is my
interest. Whether that is by pass NULL in or just not listing it in
VALUES.... that is the open question to me.
From a purist perspective, I would say that just not listing it in
values is better. However, from a practical perspective, if you have a
table with 10 columns and the _only_ one you aren't providing is the
auto-gen uuid column, it would be great if you could skip giving the
column list and just do the insert into table values (NULL, 1,2,3); form
I saw mention somewhere of a DEFAULT keyword that I've never used
before... if we used that ... insert into table values (DEFAULT, 1,2,3);
it would do the same thing and also be clear.
Yepp. And if you define semantics corresponding to an ON INSERT trigger,
you can specify anything in the INSERT statement, and still have the
UUID generator create the column value.
And referring to Roland's recent mail, if you want to use a UUID column
in a foreign key reference, it must be possible to turn off the ON
INSERT trigger.
Thanks,
Roy
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
