On 03.02.25 13:19, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
On 2025-Feb-03, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
```
If the
constraint is <literal>NOT ENFORCED</literal>, the database system will
not check the constraint. It is then up to the application code to
ensure that the constraints are satisfied. The database system might
still assume that the data actually satisfies the constraint for
optimization decisions where this does not affect the correctness of the
result.
```
IMO the third sentence should be removed because it is bogus. There's
no situation in which a not-enforced constraint can be used for any
query optimizations -- you cannot know if a constraint remains valid
after it's been turned NOT ENFORCED, because anyone could insert data
that violates it milliseconds after it stops being enforced. I think
the expectation that the application is going to correctly enforce the
constraint after it's told the database server not to enforce it, is
going to be problematic. As I recall, we already do this in FDWs for
instance and it's already a problem.
The database system could use the presence of a not enforced constraint
for selectivity estimation, for example.