Re: [SQL] Why doesn't the SERIAL data type automatically have a UNIQUE CONSTRAINT

2005-09-28 Thread codeWarrior
"Ferindo Middleton Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Is there some reason why the SERIAL data type doesn't automatically have a > UNIQUE CONSTRAINT. It seems that the main reason for using it is so that > the value for this field keeps changing automatically and

Re: [SQL] Why doesn't the SERIAL data type automatically have a UNIQUE CONSTRAINT

2005-09-26 Thread Tom Lane
Ferindo Middleton Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is there some reason why the SERIAL data type doesn't automatically have > a UNIQUE CONSTRAINT. It used to, and then we decoupled it. I don't think "I have no use for one without the other" translates to an argument that no one has a use for it