| From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: set constraints behavior |
| Date: | 2002-05-03 17:39:28 |
| Message-ID: | 20020503103842.P71279-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 3 May 2002, Neil Conway wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The SQL92 spec has this to say about SET CONSTRAINTS DEFERRED:
>
> a) If ALL is specified, then the constraint mode in TXN of all
> constraints that are DEFERRABLE is set to deferred.
>
> b) Otherwise, the constraint mode in TXN for the constraints
> identified by the <constraint name>s in the <constraint name
> list> is set to deferred.
>
> (section 14.2, page 401)
>
> My reading of this: if you specify ALL, only the constraints marked
> as DEFERRABLE are affected. If you specify a specific constraint,
> it is deferred, whether the constraint is marked as DEFERRABLE or
> not.
>
> Current Postgres behavior is incompatible with this interpretation:
I think you missed Syntax Rule 2:
"The constraint specified by <constraint name> shall be DEFERRABLE"
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2002-05-03 18:12:01 | Re: set constraints behavior |
| Previous Message | mlw | 2002-05-03 17:35:02 | Re: HEADS UP: Win32/OS2/BeOS native ports |