> Is this intended?
I can not say whether it is but I suppose it is understandable.
The reason is of course that there is no clear line between what is
column definition and what is a constraint.
Often the type of column is considered to be part of column definition.
But is limiting the range of integer type part of the type definition or
is it a constraint?
Then there is the case of domains that are meant in sql to mean type.
But in H2 they function merely as a shorthand for constraint declaration.
What about not null or unique? They are constraints but then again they
are often considered as part of the column definition.
I would go as far as declare that not null, unique, check (whether it
refers to column, table or the whole database) and referential
constraint are all constraints.
Type is an ENCAPSULATED constraint and the only MANDATORY constraint
that every column must have.
So in that worldview metadata about column would only contain it's name
and type.
And all the rest are just constraints.
I know that my answer did not help in your practical endeavours but I
just had to get it out ;-)
- rami
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "H2
Database" group.
To post to this group, send email to h2-database@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
h2-database+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/h2-database?hl=en.
