| From: | Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Lætitia Avrot <laetitia(dot)avrot(at)gmail(dot)com>, coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Constraint documentation |
| Date: | 2018-06-25 19:25:43 |
| Message-ID: | 5d8bbefa-77a4-6f01-1123-5054fdbdc953@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 25/06/18 17:45, Lætitia Avrot wrote:
> + <note>
> + <para>
> + Check constraint are not designed to enforce business rules across tables.
> + Avoid using check constraints with function accessing other tables and
"with functions" or "with a function". I prefer the former.
> + use <xref linkend="triggers"/> instead. Although PostgreSQL won't prevent you
> + from doing so, but beware that dumps generated by <application>pg_dump</application>
No but.
> + or <application>pg_dumpall</application> may be hard
> + to restore because of such checks, as the underlying dependencies are not
> + taken into account.
> + </para>
> + </note>
--
Vik Fearing +33 6 46 75 15 36
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Don Seiler | 2018-06-25 19:57:08 | Re: [PATCH] Include application_name in "connection authorized" log message |
| Previous Message | Andrey V. Lepikhov | 2018-06-25 18:20:26 | Re: [WIP] [B-Tree] Retail IndexTuple deletion |