From: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
---|---|
To: | Scott Frankel <leknarf(at)pacbell(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: data integrity and inserts |
Date: | 2004-12-01 20:59:55 |
Message-ID: | 20041201205955.GA2831@wolff.to |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 10:48:40 -0800,
Scott Frankel <leknarf(at)pacbell(dot)net> wrote:
>
> 1.
> CREATE TABLE names (the_id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY, the_name text);
> CREATE UNIQUE INDEX uidx_thename ON names(the_name);
>
> vs.
>
> 2.
> CREATE TABLE names (the_id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY, the_name text UNIQUE);
>
>
> Is the UNIQUE constraint in the second solution merely short-hand for
> the explicit
> index declaration of the first solution? Or is there a functional
> difference between
> them that I should choose between?
Currently the only way to enforce a UNIQUE constraint is by using an index.
So there isn't really much difference between the two. However, I think
using the UNIQUE constraint provides better meaning than using an index
for people who might look at your definitions later.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-12-01 21:00:05 | Re: createlang plperl fails with 8.0 beta5 |
Previous Message | Joachim Zobel | 2004-12-01 20:40:32 | Re: createlang plperl fails with 8.0 beta5 |