Because the PRIMARY KEY
makes the included column(s) NOT NULL
automatically. I quote the manual here:
The primary key constraint specifies that a column or columns of a
table can contain only unique (non-duplicate), nonnull values.
Technically, PRIMARY KEY
is merely a combination of UNIQUE
and NOT NULL
.
Bold emphasis mine.
I ran a test to confirm that NOT NULL
is completely redundant in combination with a PRIMARY KEY
constraint (in the current implementation, retested in version 13). The NOT NULL
constraint stays even after dropping the PK constraint, irregardless of an explicit NOT NULL
clause at creation time.
CREATE TABLE foo (foo_id int PRIMARY KEY);
ALTER TABLE foo DROP CONSTRAINT foo_pkey;
db=# d foo
table ?public.foo?
column | type | attribute
--------+---------+-----------
foo_id | integer | not null -- stays
db<>fiddle here
Identical behavior if NULL
is included in the CREATE TABLE
statement.
It still won't hurt to keep NOT NULL
redundantly in code repositories if the column is supposed to be NOT NULL
. If you later decide to alter the PK constraint, you might forget to mark the column NOT NULL
- or whether it even was supposed to be NOT NULL
.
There is an item in the Postgres TODO wiki to decouple NOT NULL
from the PK constraint. So this might change in future versions:
Move NOT NULL constraint information to pg_constraint
Currently NOT NULL constraints are stored in pg_attribute without any designation of their origins, e.g. primary keys. One manifest
problem is that dropping a PRIMARY KEY constraint does not remove the
NOT NULL constraint designation. Another issue is that we should
probably force NOT NULL to be propagated from parent tables to
children, just as CHECK constraints are. (But then does dropping
PRIMARY KEY affect children?)
Answer to added question
Would it not be better if this self-contradictory CREATE TABLE just
failed right there?
As explained above, this
foo_id INTEGER NULL PRIMARY KEY
is (currently) 100 % equivalent to:
foo_id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY
Since NULL
is treated as noise word in this context.
And we wouldn't want the latter to fail. So this is not an option.
与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…