On 9/5/23 19:15, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2023-Sep-05, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Looking now at what to do for CHECK_CONSTRAINTS with domain constraints, > I admit I'm completely confused about what this view is supposed to > show. Currently, we show the constraint name and a definition like > "CHECK (column IS NOT NULL)". But since the table name is not given, it > is not possible to know to what table the column name refers to. For > domains, we could show "CHECK (VALUE IS NOT NULL)" but again with no > indication of what domain it applies to, or anything at all that would > make this useful in any way whatsoever.
Constraint names are supposed to be unique per schema[1] so the view contains the minimum required information to identify the constraint.
I'm presuming that the view constraint_column_usage [1] is an integral part of all this though I haven't taken the time to figure out exactly how we are implementing it today.
I'm not all that for either A or B since the status quo seems workable. Though ideally if the system has unique names per schema then everything should just work - having the views produce duplicated information (as opposed to nothing) if they are used when the DBA doesn't enforce the standard's requirements seems plausible.