"NOTE 30 — If MATCH FULL or MATCH PARTIAL is specified for a referential constraint and if the referencing table has only one column specified in <referential constraint definition> for that referential constraint, or if the referencing table has more than one specified column for that <referential constraint definition>, but none of those columns is nullable, then the effect is the same as if no <match type> were specified."
I found that in SQL:2003 draft, so in above case MATCH FULL is syntactically ok, but rather confusing and effectively do nothing (maybe just impression purpose). Regards, G. Sz. 2011/5/9 Grzegorz Szpetkowski <gszpetkow...@gmail.com>: > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/sql-altertable.html > > "To add a foreign key constraint to a table: > > ALTER TABLE distributors ADD CONSTRAINT distfk FOREIGN KEY (address) > REFERENCES addresses (address) MATCH FULL;" > > This looks confusing to me. Is "MATCH FULL" works with non-composite > (one adress column) foreign keys at all ? > > Regards, > G. Sz. > -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
