The example for creating a check constraint is missing a comma

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

The example for creating a check constraint is missing a comma

PG Bug reporting form
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:

Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/sql-createtable.html
Description:

See the example from the documentation for CREATE TABLE below. There should
be a comma before the CONSTRAINT keyword.

CREATE TABLE distributors (
    did     integer,
    name    varchar(40)
    CONSTRAINT con1 CHECK (did > 100 AND name <> '')
);
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The example for creating a check constraint is missing a comma

Tom Lane-2
=?utf-8?q?PG_Doc_comments_form?= <[hidden email]> writes:
> See the example from the documentation for CREATE TABLE below. There should
> be a comma before the CONSTRAINT keyword.

> CREATE TABLE distributors (
>     did     integer,
>     name    varchar(40)
>     CONSTRAINT con1 CHECK (did > 100 AND name <> '')
> );

Hmm ... that example is legal syntax as-is, but considering that the
explanation for it says specifically that it's table-constraint syntax
not column-constraint syntax, I think you're right.

                        regards, tom lane

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The example for creating a check constraint is missing a comma

Neil Anderson-2
On 2018-02-15 1:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

> =?utf-8?q?PG_Doc_comments_form?= <[hidden email]> writes:
>> See the example from the documentation for CREATE TABLE below. There should
>> be a comma before the CONSTRAINT keyword.
>
>> CREATE TABLE distributors (
>>      did     integer,
>>      name    varchar(40)
>>      CONSTRAINT con1 CHECK (did > 100 AND name <> '')
>> );
>
> Hmm ... that example is legal syntax as-is, but considering that the
> explanation for it says specifically that it's table-constraint syntax
> not column-constraint syntax, I think you're right.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
Oh yeah! You're right, strictly speaking it does work. I guess I read it
as a table constraint because it's on the next line.


--
Neil Anderson
[hidden email]
http://www.postgrescompare.com

neil.vcf (174 bytes) Download Attachment