On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 08:52:00PM +1000, Morris de Oryx wrote: > I see that you've already been pointed at citext, but I don't think a CHECK > constraint has been mentioned. In case it hasn't, what about something like > this? > > ADD CONSTRAINT check_activity_status > CHECK (activity_status = 'ACTIVE' OR activity_status = 'INACTIVE'); > > I'm kind of allergic to ENUM...maybe that's just me. But since you're > considering it, maybe it's the perfect time to consider all of your > options. Such as a linked lookup table of defined allowed values (feels > silly with two values), a domain (not entirely fit to purpose), or the > CHECK constraint above. And, yeah, if it's only ever ACTIVE or INACTIVE, > I'd normally make a Boolean named something like active, as Adrian Klaver > mentioned. That's easy to reason about, and it makes it unambiguous that > there are two and only two possible states.. Thanks you. I actually have a number of these cases, and I sullied the simplest one, which just has 2 values. I guess my "C: background is showing here. I do have some similar situations where I did use a table of allowed conditions. I am thinking citext may be the best solution here. I am having an issue getting it to work, though. I don't have to do anything special to enable this type, do I? What I am really trying to do is "human proof" this input :-) -- "They that would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin
