public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Vik Fearing <[email protected]>
To: David G. Johnston <[email protected]>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Cc: Pg Hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: information_schema and not-null constraints
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2023 01:35:24 +0200
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKFQuwZJmP3bTkc2dRYySy2XXDdxx-xzVQu3sGd8bRtg+GcYwA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CAKFQuwZJmP3bTkc2dRYySy2XXDdxx-xzVQu3sGd8bRtg+GcYwA@mail.gmail.com>
On 9/6/23 00:14, David G. Johnston wrote:
>
> I'm not all that for either A or B since the status quo seems workable.
Pray tell, how is it workable? The view does not identify a specific
constraint because we don't obey the rules on one side and we do obey
the rules on the other side. It is completely useless and unworkable.
> Though ideally if the system has unique names per schema then everything
> should just work - having the views produce duplicated information (as
> opposed to nothing) if they are used when the DBA doesn't enforce the
> standard's requirements seems plausible.
Let us not engage in victim blaming. Postgres is the problem here.
--
Vik Fearing
view thread (2+ messages)
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: information_schema and not-null constraints
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox