On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Sorry to raise this once again, but I still find this CHECK NO INHERIT
> syntax to a bit funny.  We are currently using something like
> CHECK NO INHERIT (foo > 0)
> But we already have a different syntax for attaching attributes to
> constraints (NOT DEFERRABLE, NOT VALID,  etc.), so it would make more
> sense to have
> CHECK (foo > 0) NO INHERIT
> Besides consistency, this makes more sense, because the attribute is a
> property of the constraint as a whole, not of the "checking".
> This would also extend more easily to other constraint types.  For
> example, when unifying CHECK and NOT NULL constraints, as is planned, or
> when allowing inherited unique constraints, as is planned further down
> the road.


Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to