| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Rich Shepard <rshepard(at)appl-ecosys(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Comparing dates in DDL |
| Date: | 2019-01-04 17:33:24 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwbBQzEhUqQHm0zYPJ3aXbRYWO3pb=2k9_qM_O_C8EajkA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Friday, January 4, 2019, Rich Shepard <rshepard(at)appl-ecosys(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, David G. Johnston wrote:
>
> The is null expression is redundant since check constraints pass when the
>> result is unknown.
>>
>
> David,
>
> I wondered about this since NULL can be missing, unknown, or otherwise
> defined. Are there benefits to allowing an empty value in that column when
> checking that it's later than the start date rather than explicitly setting
> a default date after the start date?
>
>
I don’t understand the question...
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2019-01-04 17:35:19 | Re: (Again) Column Store on PostGreSQL |
| Previous Message | Mark Jeffcoat | 2019-01-04 17:32:41 | Re: Showing table comments with psql |