Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Erland Sommarskog Newsgroups: comp.databases.ms-sqlserver Subject: Re: SSE 2008: Check Clause Question Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 10:17:10 +0200 Organization: Erland Sommarskog Lines: 17 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="DD6dU+BfJNjsjSP4/K/V7w"; logging-data="31557"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX184qEDwXQLvyNulCvdaY3/R" User-Agent: Xnews/2006.08.24 Mime-proxy/2.1.c.0 (Win32) Cancel-Lock: sha1:ydRHP/nY1ET6p1vqDPWqWZbUHFs= Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.databases.ms-sqlserver:507 Gene Wirchenko (genew@ocis.net) writes: > That is what I have read. There is even an example purporting to > show this > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms188258.aspx > It appears to be a false alarm. So it applies to that particular example, which I don't really like. Particularly, I don't think it is a good idea to call UDFs from CHECK constraints. I put all such checks in triggers. -- Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se Links for SQL Server Books Online: SQL 2008: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/sqlserver/cc514207.aspx SQL 2005: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/sqlserver/bb895970.aspx