summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/doc/src/sgml/html/ddl-constraints.html
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/src/sgml/html/ddl-constraints.html')
-rw-r--r--doc/src/sgml/html/ddl-constraints.html607
1 files changed, 607 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/html/ddl-constraints.html b/doc/src/sgml/html/ddl-constraints.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6e51ee4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/html/ddl-constraints.html
@@ -0,0 +1,607 @@
+<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" /><title>5.4. Constraints</title><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="stylesheet.css" /><link rev="made" href="pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org" /><meta name="generator" content="DocBook XSL Stylesheets Vsnapshot" /><link rel="prev" href="ddl-generated-columns.html" title="5.3. Generated Columns" /><link rel="next" href="ddl-system-columns.html" title="5.5. System Columns" /></head><body id="docContent" class="container-fluid col-10"><div class="navheader"><table width="100%" summary="Navigation header"><tr><th colspan="5" align="center">5.4. Constraints</th></tr><tr><td width="10%" align="left"><a accesskey="p" href="ddl-generated-columns.html" title="5.3. Generated Columns">Prev</a> </td><td width="10%" align="left"><a accesskey="u" href="ddl.html" title="Chapter 5. Data Definition">Up</a></td><th width="60%" align="center">Chapter 5. Data Definition</th><td width="10%" align="right"><a accesskey="h" href="index.html" title="PostgreSQL 15.4 Documentation">Home</a></td><td width="10%" align="right"> <a accesskey="n" href="ddl-system-columns.html" title="5.5. System Columns">Next</a></td></tr></table><hr /></div><div class="sect1" id="DDL-CONSTRAINTS"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h2 class="title" style="clear: both">5.4. Constraints</h2></div></div></div><div class="toc"><dl class="toc"><dt><span class="sect2"><a href="ddl-constraints.html#DDL-CONSTRAINTS-CHECK-CONSTRAINTS">5.4.1. Check Constraints</a></span></dt><dt><span class="sect2"><a href="ddl-constraints.html#id-1.5.4.6.6">5.4.2. Not-Null Constraints</a></span></dt><dt><span class="sect2"><a href="ddl-constraints.html#DDL-CONSTRAINTS-UNIQUE-CONSTRAINTS">5.4.3. Unique Constraints</a></span></dt><dt><span class="sect2"><a href="ddl-constraints.html#DDL-CONSTRAINTS-PRIMARY-KEYS">5.4.4. Primary Keys</a></span></dt><dt><span class="sect2"><a href="ddl-constraints.html#DDL-CONSTRAINTS-FK">5.4.5. Foreign Keys</a></span></dt><dt><span class="sect2"><a href="ddl-constraints.html#DDL-CONSTRAINTS-EXCLUSION">5.4.6. Exclusion Constraints</a></span></dt></dl></div><a id="id-1.5.4.6.2" class="indexterm"></a><p>
+ Data types are a way to limit the kind of data that can be stored
+ in a table. For many applications, however, the constraint they
+ provide is too coarse. For example, a column containing a product
+ price should probably only accept positive values. But there is no
+ standard data type that accepts only positive numbers. Another issue is
+ that you might want to constrain column data with respect to other
+ columns or rows. For example, in a table containing product
+ information, there should be only one row for each product number.
+ </p><p>
+ To that end, SQL allows you to define constraints on columns and
+ tables. Constraints give you as much control over the data in your
+ tables as you wish. If a user attempts to store data in a column
+ that would violate a constraint, an error is raised. This applies
+ even if the value came from the default value definition.
+ </p><div class="sect2" id="DDL-CONSTRAINTS-CHECK-CONSTRAINTS"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h3 class="title">5.4.1. Check Constraints</h3></div></div></div><a id="id-1.5.4.6.5.2" class="indexterm"></a><a id="id-1.5.4.6.5.3" class="indexterm"></a><p>
+ A check constraint is the most generic constraint type. It allows
+ you to specify that the value in a certain column must satisfy a
+ Boolean (truth-value) expression. For instance, to require positive
+ product prices, you could use:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer,
+ name text,
+ price numeric <span class="emphasis"><strong>CHECK (price &gt; 0)</strong></span>
+);
+</pre><p>
+ </p><p>
+ As you see, the constraint definition comes after the data type,
+ just like default value definitions. Default values and
+ constraints can be listed in any order. A check constraint
+ consists of the key word <code class="literal">CHECK</code> followed by an
+ expression in parentheses. The check constraint expression should
+ involve the column thus constrained, otherwise the constraint
+ would not make too much sense.
+ </p><a id="id-1.5.4.6.5.6" class="indexterm"></a><p>
+ You can also give the constraint a separate name. This clarifies
+ error messages and allows you to refer to the constraint when you
+ need to change it. The syntax is:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer,
+ name text,
+ price numeric <span class="emphasis"><strong>CONSTRAINT positive_price</strong></span> CHECK (price &gt; 0)
+);
+</pre><p>
+ So, to specify a named constraint, use the key word
+ <code class="literal">CONSTRAINT</code> followed by an identifier followed
+ by the constraint definition. (If you don't specify a constraint
+ name in this way, the system chooses a name for you.)
+ </p><p>
+ A check constraint can also refer to several columns. Say you
+ store a regular price and a discounted price, and you want to
+ ensure that the discounted price is lower than the regular price:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer,
+ name text,
+ price numeric CHECK (price &gt; 0),
+ discounted_price numeric CHECK (discounted_price &gt; 0),
+ <span class="emphasis"><strong>CHECK (price &gt; discounted_price)</strong></span>
+);
+</pre><p>
+ </p><p>
+ The first two constraints should look familiar. The third one
+ uses a new syntax. It is not attached to a particular column,
+ instead it appears as a separate item in the comma-separated
+ column list. Column definitions and these constraint
+ definitions can be listed in mixed order.
+ </p><p>
+ We say that the first two constraints are column constraints, whereas the
+ third one is a table constraint because it is written separately
+ from any one column definition. Column constraints can also be
+ written as table constraints, while the reverse is not necessarily
+ possible, since a column constraint is supposed to refer to only the
+ column it is attached to. (<span class="productname">PostgreSQL</span> doesn't
+ enforce that rule, but you should follow it if you want your table
+ definitions to work with other database systems.) The above example could
+ also be written as:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer,
+ name text,
+ price numeric,
+ CHECK (price &gt; 0),
+ discounted_price numeric,
+ CHECK (discounted_price &gt; 0),
+ CHECK (price &gt; discounted_price)
+);
+</pre><p>
+ or even:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer,
+ name text,
+ price numeric CHECK (price &gt; 0),
+ discounted_price numeric,
+ CHECK (discounted_price &gt; 0 AND price &gt; discounted_price)
+);
+</pre><p>
+ It's a matter of taste.
+ </p><p>
+ Names can be assigned to table constraints in the same way as
+ column constraints:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer,
+ name text,
+ price numeric,
+ CHECK (price &gt; 0),
+ discounted_price numeric,
+ CHECK (discounted_price &gt; 0),
+ <span class="emphasis"><strong>CONSTRAINT valid_discount</strong></span> CHECK (price &gt; discounted_price)
+);
+</pre><p>
+ </p><a id="id-1.5.4.6.5.12" class="indexterm"></a><p>
+ It should be noted that a check constraint is satisfied if the
+ check expression evaluates to true or the null value. Since most
+ expressions will evaluate to the null value if any operand is null,
+ they will not prevent null values in the constrained columns. To
+ ensure that a column does not contain null values, the not-null
+ constraint described in the next section can be used.
+ </p><div class="note"><h3 class="title">Note</h3><p>
+ <span class="productname">PostgreSQL</span> does not support
+ <code class="literal">CHECK</code> constraints that reference table data other than
+ the new or updated row being checked. While a <code class="literal">CHECK</code>
+ constraint that violates this rule may appear to work in simple
+ tests, it cannot guarantee that the database will not reach a state
+ in which the constraint condition is false (due to subsequent changes
+ of the other row(s) involved). This would cause a database dump and
+ restore to fail. The restore could fail even when the complete
+ database state is consistent with the constraint, due to rows not
+ being loaded in an order that will satisfy the constraint. If
+ possible, use <code class="literal">UNIQUE</code>, <code class="literal">EXCLUDE</code>,
+ or <code class="literal">FOREIGN KEY</code> constraints to express
+ cross-row and cross-table restrictions.
+ </p><p>
+ If what you desire is a one-time check against other rows at row
+ insertion, rather than a continuously-maintained consistency
+ guarantee, a custom <a class="link" href="triggers.html" title="Chapter 39. Triggers">trigger</a> can be used
+ to implement that. (This approach avoids the dump/restore problem because
+ <span class="application">pg_dump</span> does not reinstall triggers until after
+ restoring data, so that the check will not be enforced during a
+ dump/restore.)
+ </p></div><div class="note"><h3 class="title">Note</h3><p>
+ <span class="productname">PostgreSQL</span> assumes that
+ <code class="literal">CHECK</code> constraints' conditions are immutable, that
+ is, they will always give the same result for the same input row.
+ This assumption is what justifies examining <code class="literal">CHECK</code>
+ constraints only when rows are inserted or updated, and not at other
+ times. (The warning above about not referencing other table data is
+ really a special case of this restriction.)
+ </p><p>
+ An example of a common way to break this assumption is to reference a
+ user-defined function in a <code class="literal">CHECK</code> expression, and
+ then change the behavior of that
+ function. <span class="productname">PostgreSQL</span> does not disallow
+ that, but it will not notice if there are rows in the table that now
+ violate the <code class="literal">CHECK</code> constraint. That would cause a
+ subsequent database dump and restore to fail.
+ The recommended way to handle such a change is to drop the constraint
+ (using <code class="command">ALTER TABLE</code>), adjust the function definition,
+ and re-add the constraint, thereby rechecking it against all table rows.
+ </p></div></div><div class="sect2" id="id-1.5.4.6.6"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h3 class="title">5.4.2. Not-Null Constraints</h3></div></div></div><a id="id-1.5.4.6.6.2" class="indexterm"></a><a id="id-1.5.4.6.6.3" class="indexterm"></a><p>
+ A not-null constraint simply specifies that a column must not
+ assume the null value. A syntax example:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer <span class="emphasis"><strong>NOT NULL</strong></span>,
+ name text <span class="emphasis"><strong>NOT NULL</strong></span>,
+ price numeric
+);
+</pre><p>
+ </p><p>
+ A not-null constraint is always written as a column constraint. A
+ not-null constraint is functionally equivalent to creating a check
+ constraint <code class="literal">CHECK (<em class="replaceable"><code>column_name</code></em>
+ IS NOT NULL)</code>, but in
+ <span class="productname">PostgreSQL</span> creating an explicit
+ not-null constraint is more efficient. The drawback is that you
+ cannot give explicit names to not-null constraints created this
+ way.
+ </p><p>
+ Of course, a column can have more than one constraint. Just write
+ the constraints one after another:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer NOT NULL,
+ name text NOT NULL,
+ price numeric NOT NULL CHECK (price &gt; 0)
+);
+</pre><p>
+ The order doesn't matter. It does not necessarily determine in which
+ order the constraints are checked.
+ </p><p>
+ The <code class="literal">NOT NULL</code> constraint has an inverse: the
+ <code class="literal">NULL</code> constraint. This does not mean that the
+ column must be null, which would surely be useless. Instead, this
+ simply selects the default behavior that the column might be null.
+ The <code class="literal">NULL</code> constraint is not present in the SQL
+ standard and should not be used in portable applications. (It was
+ only added to <span class="productname">PostgreSQL</span> to be
+ compatible with some other database systems.) Some users, however,
+ like it because it makes it easy to toggle the constraint in a
+ script file. For example, you could start with:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer NULL,
+ name text NULL,
+ price numeric NULL
+);
+</pre><p>
+ and then insert the <code class="literal">NOT</code> key word where desired.
+ </p><div class="tip"><h3 class="title">Tip</h3><p>
+ In most database designs the majority of columns should be marked
+ not null.
+ </p></div></div><div class="sect2" id="DDL-CONSTRAINTS-UNIQUE-CONSTRAINTS"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h3 class="title">5.4.3. Unique Constraints</h3></div></div></div><a id="id-1.5.4.6.7.2" class="indexterm"></a><a id="id-1.5.4.6.7.3" class="indexterm"></a><p>
+ Unique constraints ensure that the data contained in a column, or a
+ group of columns, is unique among all the rows in the
+ table. The syntax is:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer <span class="emphasis"><strong>UNIQUE</strong></span>,
+ name text,
+ price numeric
+);
+</pre><p>
+ when written as a column constraint, and:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer,
+ name text,
+ price numeric,
+ <span class="emphasis"><strong>UNIQUE (product_no)</strong></span>
+);
+</pre><p>
+ when written as a table constraint.
+ </p><p>
+ To define a unique constraint for a group of columns, write it as a
+ table constraint with the column names separated by commas:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE example (
+ a integer,
+ b integer,
+ c integer,
+ <span class="emphasis"><strong>UNIQUE (a, c)</strong></span>
+);
+</pre><p>
+ This specifies that the combination of values in the indicated columns
+ is unique across the whole table, though any one of the columns
+ need not be (and ordinarily isn't) unique.
+ </p><p>
+ You can assign your own name for a unique constraint, in the usual way:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer <span class="emphasis"><strong>CONSTRAINT must_be_different</strong></span> UNIQUE,
+ name text,
+ price numeric
+);
+</pre><p>
+ </p><p>
+ Adding a unique constraint will automatically create a unique B-tree
+ index on the column or group of columns listed in the constraint.
+ A uniqueness restriction covering only some rows cannot be written as
+ a unique constraint, but it is possible to enforce such a restriction by
+ creating a unique <a class="link" href="indexes-partial.html" title="11.8. Partial Indexes">partial index</a>.
+ </p><a id="id-1.5.4.6.7.8" class="indexterm"></a><p>
+ In general, a unique constraint is violated if there is more than
+ one row in the table where the values of all of the
+ columns included in the constraint are equal.
+ By default, two null values are not considered equal in this
+ comparison. That means even in the presence of a
+ unique constraint it is possible to store duplicate
+ rows that contain a null value in at least one of the constrained
+ columns. This behavior can be changed by adding the clause <code class="literal">NULLS
+ NOT DISTINCT</code>, like
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer UNIQUE <span class="emphasis"><strong>NULLS NOT DISTINCT</strong></span>,
+ name text,
+ price numeric
+);
+</pre><p>
+ or
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer,
+ name text,
+ price numeric,
+ UNIQUE <span class="emphasis"><strong>NULLS NOT DISTINCT</strong></span> (product_no)
+);
+</pre><p>
+ The default behavior can be specified explicitly using <code class="literal">NULLS
+ DISTINCT</code>. The default null treatment in unique constraints is
+ implementation-defined according to the SQL standard, and other
+ implementations have a different behavior. So be careful when developing
+ applications that are intended to be portable.
+ </p></div><div class="sect2" id="DDL-CONSTRAINTS-PRIMARY-KEYS"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h3 class="title">5.4.4. Primary Keys</h3></div></div></div><a id="id-1.5.4.6.8.2" class="indexterm"></a><a id="id-1.5.4.6.8.3" class="indexterm"></a><p>
+ A primary key constraint indicates that a column, or group of columns,
+ can be used as a unique identifier for rows in the table. This
+ requires that the values be both unique and not null. So, the following
+ two table definitions accept the same data:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer UNIQUE NOT NULL,
+ name text,
+ price numeric
+);
+</pre><p>
+
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer <span class="emphasis"><strong>PRIMARY KEY</strong></span>,
+ name text,
+ price numeric
+);
+</pre><p>
+ </p><p>
+ Primary keys can span more than one column; the syntax
+ is similar to unique constraints:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE example (
+ a integer,
+ b integer,
+ c integer,
+ <span class="emphasis"><strong>PRIMARY KEY (a, c)</strong></span>
+);
+</pre><p>
+ </p><p>
+ Adding a primary key will automatically create a unique B-tree index
+ on the column or group of columns listed in the primary key, and will
+ force the column(s) to be marked <code class="literal">NOT NULL</code>.
+ </p><p>
+ A table can have at most one primary key. (There can be any number
+ of unique and not-null constraints, which are functionally almost the
+ same thing, but only one can be identified as the primary key.)
+ Relational database theory
+ dictates that every table must have a primary key. This rule is
+ not enforced by <span class="productname">PostgreSQL</span>, but it is
+ usually best to follow it.
+ </p><p>
+ Primary keys are useful both for
+ documentation purposes and for client applications. For example,
+ a GUI application that allows modifying row values probably needs
+ to know the primary key of a table to be able to identify rows
+ uniquely. There are also various ways in which the database system
+ makes use of a primary key if one has been declared; for example,
+ the primary key defines the default target column(s) for foreign keys
+ referencing its table.
+ </p></div><div class="sect2" id="DDL-CONSTRAINTS-FK"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h3 class="title">5.4.5. Foreign Keys</h3></div></div></div><a id="id-1.5.4.6.9.2" class="indexterm"></a><a id="id-1.5.4.6.9.3" class="indexterm"></a><a id="id-1.5.4.6.9.4" class="indexterm"></a><p>
+ A foreign key constraint specifies that the values in a column (or
+ a group of columns) must match the values appearing in some row
+ of another table.
+ We say this maintains the <em class="firstterm">referential
+ integrity</em> between two related tables.
+ </p><p>
+ Say you have the product table that we have used several times already:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer PRIMARY KEY,
+ name text,
+ price numeric
+);
+</pre><p>
+ Let's also assume you have a table storing orders of those
+ products. We want to ensure that the orders table only contains
+ orders of products that actually exist. So we define a foreign
+ key constraint in the orders table that references the products
+ table:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE orders (
+ order_id integer PRIMARY KEY,
+ product_no integer <span class="emphasis"><strong>REFERENCES products (product_no)</strong></span>,
+ quantity integer
+);
+</pre><p>
+ Now it is impossible to create orders with non-NULL
+ <code class="structfield">product_no</code> entries that do not appear in the
+ products table.
+ </p><p>
+ We say that in this situation the orders table is the
+ <em class="firstterm">referencing</em> table and the products table is
+ the <em class="firstterm">referenced</em> table. Similarly, there are
+ referencing and referenced columns.
+ </p><p>
+ You can also shorten the above command to:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE orders (
+ order_id integer PRIMARY KEY,
+ product_no integer <span class="emphasis"><strong>REFERENCES products</strong></span>,
+ quantity integer
+);
+</pre><p>
+ because in absence of a column list the primary key of the
+ referenced table is used as the referenced column(s).
+ </p><p>
+ You can assign your own name for a foreign key constraint,
+ in the usual way.
+ </p><p>
+ A foreign key can also constrain and reference a group of columns.
+ As usual, it then needs to be written in table constraint form.
+ Here is a contrived syntax example:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE t1 (
+ a integer PRIMARY KEY,
+ b integer,
+ c integer,
+ <span class="emphasis"><strong>FOREIGN KEY (b, c) REFERENCES other_table (c1, c2)</strong></span>
+);
+</pre><p>
+ Of course, the number and type of the constrained columns need to
+ match the number and type of the referenced columns.
+ </p><a id="id-1.5.4.6.9.11" class="indexterm"></a><p>
+ Sometimes it is useful for the <span class="quote">“<span class="quote">other table</span>”</span> of a
+ foreign key constraint to be the same table; this is called
+ a <em class="firstterm">self-referential</em> foreign key. For
+ example, if you want rows of a table to represent nodes of a tree
+ structure, you could write
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE tree (
+ node_id integer PRIMARY KEY,
+ parent_id integer REFERENCES tree,
+ name text,
+ ...
+);
+</pre><p>
+ A top-level node would have NULL <code class="structfield">parent_id</code>,
+ while non-NULL <code class="structfield">parent_id</code> entries would be
+ constrained to reference valid rows of the table.
+ </p><p>
+ A table can have more than one foreign key constraint. This is
+ used to implement many-to-many relationships between tables. Say
+ you have tables about products and orders, but now you want to
+ allow one order to contain possibly many products (which the
+ structure above did not allow). You could use this table structure:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer PRIMARY KEY,
+ name text,
+ price numeric
+);
+
+CREATE TABLE orders (
+ order_id integer PRIMARY KEY,
+ shipping_address text,
+ ...
+);
+
+CREATE TABLE order_items (
+ product_no integer REFERENCES products,
+ order_id integer REFERENCES orders,
+ quantity integer,
+ PRIMARY KEY (product_no, order_id)
+);
+</pre><p>
+ Notice that the primary key overlaps with the foreign keys in
+ the last table.
+ </p><a id="id-1.5.4.6.9.14" class="indexterm"></a><a id="id-1.5.4.6.9.15" class="indexterm"></a><p>
+ We know that the foreign keys disallow creation of orders that
+ do not relate to any products. But what if a product is removed
+ after an order is created that references it? SQL allows you to
+ handle that as well. Intuitively, we have a few options:
+ </p><div class="itemizedlist"><ul class="itemizedlist compact" style="list-style-type: disc; "><li class="listitem"><p>Disallow deleting a referenced product</p></li><li class="listitem"><p>Delete the orders as well</p></li><li class="listitem"><p>Something else?</p></li></ul></div><p>
+ </p><p>
+ To illustrate this, let's implement the following policy on the
+ many-to-many relationship example above: when someone wants to
+ remove a product that is still referenced by an order (via
+ <code class="literal">order_items</code>), we disallow it. If someone
+ removes an order, the order items are removed as well:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE products (
+ product_no integer PRIMARY KEY,
+ name text,
+ price numeric
+);
+
+CREATE TABLE orders (
+ order_id integer PRIMARY KEY,
+ shipping_address text,
+ ...
+);
+
+CREATE TABLE order_items (
+ product_no integer REFERENCES products <span class="emphasis"><strong>ON DELETE RESTRICT</strong></span>,
+ order_id integer REFERENCES orders <span class="emphasis"><strong>ON DELETE CASCADE</strong></span>,
+ quantity integer,
+ PRIMARY KEY (product_no, order_id)
+);
+</pre><p>
+ </p><p>
+ Restricting and cascading deletes are the two most common options.
+ <code class="literal">RESTRICT</code> prevents deletion of a
+ referenced row. <code class="literal">NO ACTION</code> means that if any
+ referencing rows still exist when the constraint is checked, an error
+ is raised; this is the default behavior if you do not specify anything.
+ (The essential difference between these two choices is that
+ <code class="literal">NO ACTION</code> allows the check to be deferred until
+ later in the transaction, whereas <code class="literal">RESTRICT</code> does not.)
+ <code class="literal">CASCADE</code> specifies that when a referenced row is deleted,
+ row(s) referencing it should be automatically deleted as well.
+ There are two other options:
+ <code class="literal">SET NULL</code> and <code class="literal">SET DEFAULT</code>.
+ These cause the referencing column(s) in the referencing row(s)
+ to be set to nulls or their default
+ values, respectively, when the referenced row is deleted.
+ Note that these do not excuse you from observing any constraints.
+ For example, if an action specifies <code class="literal">SET DEFAULT</code>
+ but the default value would not satisfy the foreign key constraint, the
+ operation will fail.
+ </p><p>
+ The appropriate choice of <code class="literal">ON DELETE</code> action depends on
+ what kinds of objects the related tables represent. When the referencing
+ table represents something that is a component of what is represented by
+ the referenced table and cannot exist independently, then
+ <code class="literal">CASCADE</code> could be appropriate. If the two tables
+ represent independent objects, then <code class="literal">RESTRICT</code> or
+ <code class="literal">NO ACTION</code> is more appropriate; an application that
+ actually wants to delete both objects would then have to be explicit about
+ this and run two delete commands. In the above example, order items are
+ part of an order, and it is convenient if they are deleted automatically
+ if an order is deleted. But products and orders are different things, and
+ so making a deletion of a product automatically cause the deletion of some
+ order items could be considered problematic. The actions <code class="literal">SET
+ NULL</code> or <code class="literal">SET DEFAULT</code> can be appropriate if a
+ foreign-key relationship represents optional information. For example, if
+ the products table contained a reference to a product manager, and the
+ product manager entry gets deleted, then setting the product's product
+ manager to null or a default might be useful.
+ </p><p>
+ The actions <code class="literal">SET NULL</code> and <code class="literal">SET DEFAULT</code>
+ can take a column list to specify which columns to set. Normally, all
+ columns of the foreign-key constraint are set; setting only a subset is
+ useful in some special cases. Consider the following example:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE tenants (
+ tenant_id integer PRIMARY KEY
+);
+
+CREATE TABLE users (
+ tenant_id integer REFERENCES tenants ON DELETE CASCADE,
+ user_id integer NOT NULL,
+ PRIMARY KEY (tenant_id, user_id)
+);
+
+CREATE TABLE posts (
+ tenant_id integer REFERENCES tenants ON DELETE CASCADE,
+ post_id integer NOT NULL,
+ author_id integer,
+ PRIMARY KEY (tenant_id, post_id),
+ FOREIGN KEY (tenant_id, author_id) REFERENCES users ON DELETE SET NULL <span class="emphasis"><strong>(author_id)</strong></span>
+);
+</pre><p>
+ Without the specification of the column, the foreign key would also set
+ the column <code class="literal">tenant_id</code> to null, but that column is still
+ required as part of the primary key.
+ </p><p>
+ Analogous to <code class="literal">ON DELETE</code> there is also
+ <code class="literal">ON UPDATE</code> which is invoked when a referenced
+ column is changed (updated). The possible actions are the same,
+ except that column lists cannot be specified for <code class="literal">SET
+ NULL</code> and <code class="literal">SET DEFAULT</code>.
+ In this case, <code class="literal">CASCADE</code> means that the updated values of the
+ referenced column(s) should be copied into the referencing row(s).
+ </p><p>
+ Normally, a referencing row need not satisfy the foreign key constraint
+ if any of its referencing columns are null. If <code class="literal">MATCH FULL</code>
+ is added to the foreign key declaration, a referencing row escapes
+ satisfying the constraint only if all its referencing columns are null
+ (so a mix of null and non-null values is guaranteed to fail a
+ <code class="literal">MATCH FULL</code> constraint). If you don't want referencing rows
+ to be able to avoid satisfying the foreign key constraint, declare the
+ referencing column(s) as <code class="literal">NOT NULL</code>.
+ </p><p>
+ A foreign key must reference columns that either are a primary key or
+ form a unique constraint. This means that the referenced columns always
+ have an index (the one underlying the primary key or unique constraint);
+ so checks on whether a referencing row has a match will be efficient.
+ Since a <code class="command">DELETE</code> of a row from the referenced table
+ or an <code class="command">UPDATE</code> of a referenced column will require
+ a scan of the referencing table for rows matching the old value, it
+ is often a good idea to index the referencing columns too. Because this
+ is not always needed, and there are many choices available on how
+ to index, declaration of a foreign key constraint does not
+ automatically create an index on the referencing columns.
+ </p><p>
+ More information about updating and deleting data is in <a class="xref" href="dml.html" title="Chapter 6. Data Manipulation">Chapter 6</a>. Also see the description of foreign key constraint
+ syntax in the reference documentation for
+ <a class="xref" href="sql-createtable.html" title="CREATE TABLE"><span class="refentrytitle">CREATE TABLE</span></a>.
+ </p></div><div class="sect2" id="DDL-CONSTRAINTS-EXCLUSION"><div class="titlepage"><div><div><h3 class="title">5.4.6. Exclusion Constraints</h3></div></div></div><a id="id-1.5.4.6.10.2" class="indexterm"></a><a id="id-1.5.4.6.10.3" class="indexterm"></a><p>
+ Exclusion constraints ensure that if any two rows are compared on
+ the specified columns or expressions using the specified operators,
+ at least one of these operator comparisons will return false or null.
+ The syntax is:
+</p><pre class="programlisting">
+CREATE TABLE circles (
+ c circle,
+ EXCLUDE USING gist (c WITH &amp;&amp;)
+);
+</pre><p>
+ </p><p>
+ See also <a class="link" href="sql-createtable.html#SQL-CREATETABLE-EXCLUDE"><code class="command">CREATE
+ TABLE ... CONSTRAINT ... EXCLUDE</code></a> for details.
+ </p><p>
+ Adding an exclusion constraint will automatically create an index
+ of the type specified in the constraint declaration.
+ </p></div></div><div class="navfooter"><hr /><table width="100%" summary="Navigation footer"><tr><td width="40%" align="left"><a accesskey="p" href="ddl-generated-columns.html" title="5.3. Generated Columns">Prev</a> </td><td width="20%" align="center"><a accesskey="u" href="ddl.html" title="Chapter 5. Data Definition">Up</a></td><td width="40%" align="right"> <a accesskey="n" href="ddl-system-columns.html" title="5.5. System Columns">Next</a></td></tr><tr><td width="40%" align="left" valign="top">5.3. Generated Columns </td><td width="20%" align="center"><a accesskey="h" href="index.html" title="PostgreSQL 15.4 Documentation">Home</a></td><td width="40%" align="right" valign="top"> 5.5. System Columns</td></tr></table></div></body></html> \ No newline at end of file