From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Bug in pg_get_constraintdef (for deferrable constraints) |
Date: | 2003-01-01 21:47:34 |
Message-ID: | 20030101133815.Y81242-200000@megazone23.bigpanda.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 1 Jan 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > > I see the values being stored on constriant creation, but not being used
> > > anywhere:
> >
> > I believe the values that actually get inspected at runtime are the
> > tgdeferrable and tginitdeferred fields in pg_trigger. The columns in
> > pg_constraint are just copies of these.
> >
> > It is not real clear to me whether it should be allowed to alter the
> > deferrability status of a foreign-key constraint --- is that in the spec?
>
> The big problem is that while pg_dump's dump_trigger() looks at
> tginitdeferred and dumps accordingly, pg_get_constraintdef doesn't look
> at tginitdeferred, and therefore doesn't record the requirement as part
> of ALTER TABLE ADD CONSTRAINT.
pg_get_constraintdef should probably be looking at condeferrable
and condeferred in the pg_constraint row it's looking at. Maybe something
like the attached.
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
get_constraints.patch | text/plain | 629 bytes |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | mlw | 2003-01-01 23:02:12 | Re: PostgreSQL Password Cracker |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-01-01 21:15:53 | Re: Bug in pg_get_constraintdef (for deferrable constraints) |