Hi,

Tom Lane wrote:
DBAs tend to be belt *and* suspenders guys, no?

I rather know those admins with stupid looking faces who are wondering why their transactions fail. Often enough, that can have a lot of different reasons. Extending the set of possible traps doesn't seem like a clever idea for those admins.

I'd think a lot of them
would want a table constraint, plus a partitioning rule that rejects
anything outside the intended partitions.

I'm rather a fan of the DRY principle (don't repeat yourself). Because having to maintain redundant constraints smells suspiciously like a maintenance nightmare.

And where's the real use of making the database system check twice? Want to protect against memory corruption in between the two checks, eh? :-)

Regards

Markus


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
      choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
      match

Reply via email to