|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2005-11-18 20:39:23
|
Patches item #1181657, was opened at 2005-04-12 21:40 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by phd You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=540674&aid=1181657&group_id=74338 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Rejected Priority: 5 Submitted By: David M. Cook (daverz) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Direct support for UNIQUE table constraint Initial Comment: This is a patch to provide direct support for UNIQUE table constraints by marking each column in the constraint with uniqueKey=True. I stole the idea from hibernate (actually in hibernate you specify a constraint name, so you can have multiple unique constraints per table; this is just a first pass at the idea and a RFC). class Foo(SQLObject): baz = StringCol(uniqueKey=True) quux = StringCol(uniqueKey=True) would produce CREATE TABLE foo ( id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, quux TEXT, baz TEXT, UNIQUE(quux, baz) ); Right now you can get the same practical effect with a unique index, but this provides direct semantic (or is it syntactic? I get them confused) support for unique table constraints, and lets the database decide how it will enforce the constraint. I think all the supported DBs support UNIQUE table constraints, I haven't checked yet. I'll try to come up with some test cases later. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Oleg Broytmann (phd) Date: 2005-09-13 16:58 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=4799 Then close the patch, please. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: David M. Cook (daverz) Date: 2005-04-13 05:10 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=668544 Eh, after implementing this, even allowing multiple constraints per column, my enthusiasm has cooled. It's redundant, and I think doing it with unique indexes actually makes the intent clearer, e.g. c1 = DatabaseIndex('bar', 'baz', unique=True) c2 = DatabaseIndex('bar', 'quux', unique=True) vs. bar = StringCol(uniqueKey=('c1', 'c2')) baz = StringCol(uniqueKey='c1') quux = StringCol(uniqueKey='c2') ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=540674&aid=1181657&group_id=74338 |
