On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-07-22 at 23:35 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On ons, 2011-07-13 at 11:26 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> > Our standard reason for not implementing UNIQUE constraints on
>> > expressions has been that then you would have a thing that
On Fri, 2011-07-22 at 23:35 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On ons, 2011-07-13 at 11:26 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Our standard reason for not implementing UNIQUE constraints on
> > expressions has been that then you would have a thing that claims to be
> > a UNIQUE constraint but isn't representa
On ons, 2011-07-13 at 11:26 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dean Rasheed writes:
> >>> On 7/12/11 9:46 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> I guess $subject wasn't implemented because plain unique indexes aren't
> represented in pg_constraint and thus do not have a place to store
> information about
Dean Rasheed writes:
>>> On 7/12/11 9:46 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
I guess $subject wasn't implemented because plain unique indexes aren't
represented in pg_constraint and thus do not have a place to store
information about being deferred?
> I agree that expressing that using a UNIQ
On 13 July 2011 01:23, Andres Freund wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 12, 2011 08:57:44 PM Dean Rasheed wrote:
>> On 12 July 2011 19:26, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> > On 7/12/11 9:46 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I guess $subject wasn't implemented because plain unique indexes aren't
>> >> re
On Tuesday, July 12, 2011 08:57:44 PM Dean Rasheed wrote:
> On 12 July 2011 19:26, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > On 7/12/11 9:46 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I guess $subject wasn't implemented because plain unique indexes aren't
> >> represented in pg_constraint and thus do not have a pl
On 12 July 2011 19:26, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 7/12/11 9:46 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I guess $subject wasn't implemented because plain unique indexes aren't
>> represented in pg_constraint and thus do not have a place to store
>> information
>> about being deferred?
>> Other than tha
On 7/12/11 9:46 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I guess $subject wasn't implemented because plain unique indexes aren't
> represented in pg_constraint and thus do not have a place to store
> information
> about being deferred?
> Other than that I do not see any special complications in imple
Hi,
I guess $subject wasn't implemented because plain unique indexes aren't
represented in pg_constraint and thus do not have a place to store information
about being deferred?
Other than that I do not see any special complications in implementing it?
Is there any reasons not to store unique in
