On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > Excerpts from Dean Rasheed's message of vie nov 25 13:45:34 -0300 2011: > >> Looking back at Thom's original example, it seems odd to allow this >> syntax at all: >> >> CREATE TABLE a ( >> num integer, >> CONSTRAINT meow CHECK ((num < 20)) NOT VALID >> ); >> >> It's not documented, but is currently allowed. However, since all data >> subsequently added to the table is checked against the constraint, the >> constraint is guaranteed to be valid, so there seems to be no point in >> allowing it to be declared NOT VALID. > > Hah ... interesting. Not sure it's worth fussing about this. If the > user shoots himself in the foot by declaring an unvalidated constraint, > which is not even documented, are we really at fault? >
i can't find anything about this in the standard, so i guess even if the standard allows us to turn checks off. ours is not standard syntax so, IMHO, it should be only in ALTER TABLE. -- Jaime Casanova www.2ndQuadrant.com Professional PostgreSQL: Soporte 24x7 y capacitación -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
