Create an account

Very important

  • To access the important data of the forums, you must be active in each forum and especially in the leaks and database leaks section, send data and after sending the data and activity, data and important content will be opened and visible for you.
  • You will only see chat messages from people who are at or below your level.
  • More than 500,000 database leaks and millions of account leaks are waiting for you, so access and view with more activity.
  • Many important data are inactive and inaccessible for you, so open them with activity. (This will be done automatically)


Thread Rating:
  • 508 Vote(s) - 3.42 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
WITH CHECK ADD CONSTRAINT followed by CHECK CONSTRAINT vs. ADD CONSTRAINT

#1
I'm looking at the AdventureWorks sample database for SQL Server 2008, and I see in their creation scripts that they tend to use the following:

ALTER TABLE [Production].[ProductCostHistory] WITH CHECK ADD
CONSTRAINT [FK_ProductCostHistory_Product_ProductID] FOREIGN KEY([ProductID])
REFERENCES [Production].[Product] ([ProductID])
GO

followed immediately by :

ALTER TABLE [Production].[ProductCostHistory] CHECK CONSTRAINT
[FK_ProductCostHistory_Product_ProductID]
GO

I see this for foreign keys (as here), unique constraints and regular `CHECK` constraints; `DEFAULT` constraints use the regular format I am more familiar with such as:

ALTER TABLE [Production].[ProductCostHistory] ADD CONSTRAINT
[DF_ProductCostHistory_ModifiedDate] DEFAULT (getdate()) FOR [ModifiedDate]
GO

What is the difference, if any, between doing it the first way versus the second?
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

©0Day  2016 - 2023 | All Rights Reserved.  Made with    for the community. Connected through