From: | Victor Wagner <vitus(at)ice(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Referential integrity problem postgresql 7.2 ? |
Date: | 2002-06-11 20:13:11 |
Message-ID: | 20020611201311.GA15350@ice.ru |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
On 2002.06.11 at 14:43:17 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> writes:
> > It should work (and does in current sources). If you look in the archives
> > you should be able to get info on how to patch 7.2 (it came up recently,
> > I'm not sure which list, and Tom Lane sent the message in question).
>
> BTW, should we back-patch that into 7.2.*? I was resistant to the idea
I would appreciate this.
I doubt that I it would fix problem with
update sometable set a=a+1
where there exist unique index on sometable(a), but it would make
postgresql behavoir closer to standard SQL.
In my (user) point of view, it is obvoisly bugfix, rather than added
feature, so it has right to appear in 7.2.x release.
> because of concern about lack of testing, but seeing that we've gotten
> several complaints maybe we should do it anyway.
--
Victor Wagner vitus(at)ice(dot)ru
Chief Technical Officer Office:7-(095)-748-53-88
Communiware.Net Home: 7-(095)-135-46-61
http://www.communiware.net http://www.ice.ru/~vitus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | pgsql-bugs | 2002-06-11 20:34:26 | Bug #690: pg_ctl doesn't act properly for option -w |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-06-11 19:27:22 | Re: Referential integrity problem postgresql 7.2 ? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2002-06-11 20:52:21 | Re: Referential integrity problem postgresql 7.2 ? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-06-11 19:27:22 | Re: Referential integrity problem postgresql 7.2 ? |