[jwie]

You would think they would be saving (and charging the customer!) a bundle not enforcing constraints on their tables.

I’d be very interested to hear the Snowflake side of this decision, but to the customer it’s simply unforgivable to have cosmetic constraints on a database.

[dominotw]

Because snowflake doesn't build foreign key indexes. Imagine clickstream data where every insert is being checked against an index of customers. This isn't a typical usecase for big data warehouses.

[jwie]

I understand that. But why have constraints that don’t do anything?

[evtx]

There are plenty of reasons why MPP databases allow the definition of constraints but don't enforce them. I'll list two: 1) BI tools can use them to optimize joins 2) Data modeling tools can use them to reverse engineers models without having to pattern match the keys.

That said, Snowflake does support constraints if you use hybrid tables (a preview feature announced at their last conference).

[atwebb]

Metadata

Tools and scripts can work off of it, design decisions are documented, suggestions can be made, inferences can be made (some dangerous, some not).

Why tag S3 objects if it doesn't enforce a schema? Maybe a bad analogue but I'm going quick right now :).

[marcinzm]

Do you have any data on the pricing of distributed databases that do support proper foreign key constraints? And how it stacks against Snowflake pricing?

[veeti]

Do you really need functional constraints in a OLAP database? Surely such validations already exist wherever your data is coming from.

[Foobar8568]

Ohohoh yeah sure, you mean application based constraints? Or an Entity–attribute–value base application ? What about documents?