From: Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com>
To: Kenneth Gonsalves <lawgon@thenilgiris.com>
Cc: Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>
Cc: weberp@paradise.net.nz
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Query performance problem
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:19:28 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <20050318051614.Q61964@megazone.bigpanda.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200503181049.47566.lawgon@thenilgiris.com>
References: <200503172120.20676.weberp@paradise.net.nz>
<200503171801.19412.lawgon@thenilgiris.com>
<42398EB9.2050707@archonet.com>
<200503181049.47566.lawgon@thenilgiris.com>
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
> On Thursday 17 Mar 2005 7:35 pm, Richard Huxton wrote:
>
> > Not necessarily. NOT NULL here helps to ensure you can add values
> > together without the risk of a null result. There are plenty of
> > "amount" columns that should be not-null (total spent, total
> > ordered etc).
>
> that makes sense - but is it necessary to have a not null constraint
> when there is a default value?
It's also an added check which prevents you from explicitly setting the
value to NULL in an insert or update, since
"insert into foo(col1) values (NULL);" shouldn't insert the default value
into col1. This is relatively minor generally, but if you have queries
whose behavior is broken by NULLs (things using IN/NOT IN for example)
it's better to be safe.
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: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com, lawgon@thenilgiris.com, dev@archonet.com, weberp@paradise.net.nz
Subject: Re: Query performance problem
In-Reply-To: <20050318051614.Q61964@megazone.bigpanda.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox