On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 11:20:59PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
There is some moderately interesting reading material in section
4.17.4 Domain constraints of SQL:2008.
Not sure where to look for a copy of that, nor any particularly helpful
links :(
In particular, it appears to
me that the standard
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 05:13:21AM +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
But there's a kicker: in Subclause 6.12, cast specification, in the
General Rules is:
a) If the cast operand specifies NULL, then the result of CS is
the null value and no further General Rules of this Subclause
Sam == Sam Mason s...@samason.me.uk writes:
But there's a kicker: in Subclause 6.12, cast specification, in the
General Rules is:
a) If the cast operand specifies NULL, then the result of CS is
the null value and no further General Rules of this Subclause
are applied.
That no
Andrew Gierth and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk writes:
Sam == Sam Mason s...@samason.me.uk writes:
Sam The NOT NULL constraint feels wrong as well, what are the
Sam semantics of:
Sam CREATE DOMAIN d AS INTEGER NOT NULL;
Sam SELECT a.n AS aa, b.n AS bb
Sam FROM (VALUES (CAST(1 AS
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 02:54:18PM +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
the spec _does_ appear to allow CHECK(VALUE IS NOT NULL) as a
domain constraint (in general the spec defines NOT NULL constraints
this way),
Huh, that's a trivial rewrite isn't it. Not sure why it didn't occur to
me that it's just
Since our shop seems to use domains more than most, I figured I
should comment on this thread.
Sam Mason s...@samason.me.uk wrote:
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 02:54:18PM +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
and the wording from 6.12 implies that that check is still
skipped in the case of NULLs (so that
[ probably time to move this thread to -hackers ]
There is some moderately interesting reading material in section
4.17.4 Domain constraints of SQL:2008. In particular, it appears to
me that the standard goes out of its way to NOT claim that every value
that is of a domain type satisfies the
Tom == Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes:
Tom [ probably time to move this thread to -hackers ]
Tom There is some moderately interesting reading material in section
Tom 4.17.4 Domain constraints of SQL:2008. In particular, it
Tom appears to me that the standard goes out of its way to NOT
