Bernd Helmle wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >* It's too early in the morning for me to be clear about the difference > >between CASCADED and LOCAL CHECK OPTION --- I think that this would > >merely alter the set of check constraints collected for a particular > >query, but if there's something more fundamental there, this scheme > >might not work at all. So look into that first. > > LOCAL checks the data to be updated against its own view WHERE > condition only, where CASCADED involves all WHERE conditions of all > underlying views. I don't understand this part very well. Say if you have a view WITH CHECK OPTION whose condition is "foo > 5", and then define a view WITH LOCAL CHECK OPTION on top of that, whose condition is "bar > 5". Does the local check option on the second view that I can insert a row with foo=4, bar=6? That doesn't violate the condition of bar > 5, so it seems fine to me. But it also seems quite idiotic because it violated the original foo>5 condition. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
