Re: small exclusion constraints patch
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2010-05-30T03:55:02Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 11:40 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Or, to put it differently: if nobody's done that in the past twenty >>> years, why is it likely to happen before 9.1? > >> Hmm. Well suppose we bet a dollar on whether that will happen or not. >> In fact, if you promise not to read >> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-05/msg01175.php I'll >> make it two dollars. > > Yes, I've seen Jeff's example. It's a cute hack but somehow I doubt > that there is going to be a land rush to implement such things. > Can you point to any pre-existing example where anyone actually asked > for the ability to do that? I've often wished for the ability to constrain a tale to hold just one row, so I don't find that use case implausible at all. As to whether Jeff's use case is a cute hack or something that people will really want to do, I think the jury's still out on that one. But I don't think we should make it not work unless we have a concrete reason, and I haven't heard one yet. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company