Re: Subqueries in Check() -- Still Intentionally Omitted? - Mailing list pgsql-general

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:

> The problem is that you have to rerun the query to verify that the CHECK
> condition still holds, whenever the table that the CHECK clause is
> checking changes.  This is rather problematic, because we'd need to make
> the system aware of such reverse dependencies.

Thanks for the clarification.  This makes sense.


--
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.

Visit the Los Angeles PostgreSQL Users Group (LAPUG)
http://pugs.postgresql.org/lapug