Re: UNIQUE boolean: only one row may be "true"

Randall Lucas <rlucas@tercent.net> writes:
> Do you have any suggestions on how this might 
> better be implemented?  It seems to me that with a partial index, there 
> is not too much overhead and it doesn't seem too offensively 
> un-boycecoddean.

FWIW, I'd go with the unique partial index too.  It's a very efficient
solution.  But it's not portable :-(.  I'd be interested to hear what
people would do to solve this problem in bog-standard SQL.
        regards, tom lane