Thanks for your remarks and advices, and of course for your help to
rewrite the text.
So, it is now included in the new version attached.
I hope it will be ok this time.
Patrick Francelle
On 10/30/18 17:14, David G. Johnston wrote:
> The product name, when used in the documentation, is "PostgreSQL" with
> appropriate html elements surrounding it.
>
> Some parts that look or read oddly to me:
> "you may expect troubles"
> Use - if possible - (commas, not hypens, are customary here)
> "does not currently" - drop "currently", it doesn't and we don't need
> to predict the future (same goes for "are currently meant")
> "therefore we recommend to avoid them" - they are unsupported, the
> implied recommended is to not use them period, not avoid them if
> possible. Better to say that it isn't enforced even though it is
> unsupported.
>
> An alternative to consider as one the whole the reading of the v4
> patch just feels off and different than the rest of that section of
> the documentation.
>
> PostgreSQL does not support writing CHECK constraints that reference
> tables (though it does not reliably prevent one from doing so). While
> normal operations are likely to succeed even if you violate this rule
> it is probable that a database restoration will fail. Use FOREIGN KEY
> constraints or custom triggers for cross-table validations. For rows
> on the same table you should use UNIQUE or EXCLUDE constraints when
> applicable, or a custom trigger otherwise.
>
> David J.
>