Am 24.03.2024 um 16:35 schrieb sud:
On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 8:47 PM Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Do you specifically mean that 'null' keyword is just not making any
sense here in postgres. But even if that is the case , i tried inserting
nothing (hoping "nothing" is "null" in true sense), but then too it
failed in the first statement while inserting which is fine as per the PK.
To the best of my knowledge, your assumption is correct. And therefore
the insert must fail because a pk never must contain null values.
But don't you think,in the first place it shouldn't have been allowed to
create the table with one of the composite PK columns being defined as
NULL. And then , while inserting the null record, it should say that the
PK constraint is violated but not the "not null constraint" violated.
CREATE TABLE test1
(
c1 numeric NULL ,
c2 varchar(36) NOT NULL ,
CONSTRAINT test1_PK PRIMARY KEY (c1,c2)
) ;
insert into test1(c2) values('123');
/*ERROR: null value in column "c1" of relation "test1" violates not-null
constraint DETAIL: Failing row contains (null, 123).*/
I feel largely the same way. The definition is contradictory but there
is no message to tell you so.
