Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Darren Duncan
Subject Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint
Date
Msg-id 5110D35F.7040103@darrenduncan.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint  (Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreak@officenet.no>)
Responses Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint  (Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreak@officenet.no>)
Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint  (Виктор Егоров <vyegorov@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
Deferrable foreign key and unique key constraints I can understand, but ...

On 2013.02.05 1:22 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote:
> +100 for having NOT NULL and CHECK-constraints deferrable:-)
> Is there any "I want to sponsor development of <feature-X> with $xxx" mechanism?

I'd like to know what value there is in making NOT NULL and CHECK deferrable.

While we're at it, do we want to make the column data type check constraints
deferrable too, so you can initially assign any value at all without regard for
the declared type of the column?  Then we only at constraints-immediate time
say, sorry, you can't put a string in a number column, or, sorry, that number is
too large, or that string is too long, or whatever.

NOT NULL and CHECK constraints are effectively just part of a data type
definition after all.  Postgres' current behavior is fairly consistent; if we
make these deferrable, then why stop there?

-- Darren Duncan

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Misa Simic
Date:
Subject: Re: partial time stamp query
Next
From: Andreas Joseph Krogh
Date:
Subject: Re: DEFERRABLE NOT NULL constraint