From: | Rémi Cura <remi(dot)cura(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Manuel Gómez <targen(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: forcing a table (parent in inheritance) tor emain empty |
Date: | 2016-10-11 17:04:00 |
Message-ID: | CAJvUf_uZUxu41oO-8rKKXhyD=iVjveLKj5JhRAcawaCyRxXUsA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
This solution is very nice.
Sadly the check is inherited by the children
(I only want the parent to be empty, not the children).
It seems the element that are not inherited are
- Indexes
- Unique constraints
- Primary Keys
- Foreign keys
- Rules and Triggers
thanks anyway for the fast answer,
Cheers,
Rémi C
2016-10-11 18:33 GMT+02:00 Manuel Gómez <targen(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Rémi Cura <remi(dot)cura(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Hey dear list,
> > I can't find a nice solution to enforce a necessary behaviour in my case
> :
> > I want a parent table to remain empty.
> >
> > Of course I could define a trigger and return NULL in any case, but I'd
> like
> > a more elegant approach using check or constraints.
>
> You could probably do it with a simple constraint:
>
> postgres=# create table dum(check (false));
> CREATE TABLE
> postgres=# insert into dum default values;
> ERROR: new row for relation "dum" violates check constraint "dum_check"
> DETAIL: Failing row contains ().
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2016-10-11 17:12:34 | Re: forcing a table (parent in inheritance) tor emain empty |
Previous Message | Sylvain MARECHAL | 2016-10-11 16:55:13 | Re: BDR: changing dsn on a running node |