Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint

From: Bèrto ëd Sèra <berto(dot)d(dot)sera(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Chris Angelico <rosuav(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint
Date: 2013-02-06 11:36:03
Message-ID: CAKwGa_-RyRP6ekGB+0aOAYYtE0YQYNRp6iiJZx99eB9v-8uH_A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Hi

> I still don't see how that's any better than a stored procedure that
> directly does the INSERT. You can conceal the code every bit as
> easily.

Guys I DO NOT write the customers' security guidelines. I get asked to
produce a design in which "party X will make plain INSERTs and ignore
the very existence of business rules". Can I do it in PG, No. Can I
rewrite the guidelines? No. Hence, PG is not used. Full stop.

Whether these customers are clever or stupid is not an issue. They are
paying customers, so they are right by design. And yes, sometimes I
manage to sell them something else, as I said earlier. Some other
times I end up having to use a db that is not PG. Easy as that.

Cheers
Bèrto

--
==============================
If Pac-Man had affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in a
darkened room munching pills and listening to repetitive music.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Angelico 2013-02-06 11:56:31 Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint
Previous Message drew_hunt1976 2013-02-06 11:01:20 Need help understanding WAL and checkpoints