All:
Run the following script:
drop table letter;
create table letter (
a char(1),
b char(1),
c char(1),
unique (a, b, c)
);
insert into letter values('1','2','3');
insert into letter values('1','2','3');
insert into letter (a,c) values ('1','3');
insert into letter (a,c) values ('1','3');
Notice that the second insert of ('1','2','3') yields an error message,
which is the correct behavior - (that is the unique constaint is
working),
while the last insert of ('1','3') does not yield an error message -
(that is
the unique constraint doesn't work in this case - I think it should).
It appears as though the null value inserted for column b causes an
abrogation
of the unique constaint.
Is this intended or is it a bug?
Or should I be doing something different?
Thanks
Merrill
