Re: operator exclusion constraints

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Dean Rasheed
Тема Re: operator exclusion constraints
Дата
Msg-id 8e2dbb700911031331p49c5763fl277df34006d3d3d5@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: operator exclusion constraints  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: operator exclusion constraints  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
2009/11/3 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
> Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> writes:
>> I'm not excited about using NOT, because I think it has a hint of a
>> double-negative when combined with EXCLUSION.
>
> Well, the choice of EXCLUSION isn't set in stone either ...
>

Is this really a generalized uniqueness constraint, extended to
support operators other than = ?
Perhaps sticking with the word UNIQUE might be more suggestive of this:
 UNIQUE (room_number WITH = , during WITH &&)

or:
 UNIQUE (room_number , during USING && )

- Dean


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Steve Crawford
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: EOL for 7.4?
Следующее
От: Jeff Davis
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: operator exclusion constraints