Re: Facing error while restoring the database

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Albe Laurenz" <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>
Cc: "Akshay Joshi *EXTERN*" <akshay(dot)joshi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Facing error while restoring the database
Date: 2012-03-27 14:10:56
Message-ID: 29488.1332857456@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

"Albe Laurenz" <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> writes:
> pg_dump does not resolve dependencies, it avoids problems by adding
> constraints after inserting the data.

> It seems that this is not done for CHECK constraints, however - they are
> added when the table is defined.

> I think that this is a bug.

It is not a bug; it is an unsafe and unsupported use of CHECK
constraints.

Using a CHECK to enforce a cross-row constraint is fundamentally broken,
because there is no way for the database to know that the constraint
might be violated after the *other* row is modified. In the example
at hand, a change in sample_one.param_names could leave the constraint
unsatisfied for some rows in sample, but the database wouldn't detect
that.

I think the right fix here would be to redesign the table schema so that
the required cross-table constraint could be expressed as a foreign key.
We don't have enough context to guess at what a better design would
look like, though.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message vossistemas 2012-03-27 14:33:17 windows 7 não funciona Adeus Postgresql
Previous Message Albe Laurenz 2012-03-27 13:48:08 Re: Facing error while restoring the database