Re: FK type mismatches?

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: FK type mismatches?
Date: 2003-09-05 21:59:52
Message-ID: 200309052159.h85Lxqr24833@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Treat wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 17:06, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Neil Conway writes:
> >
> > > Should this produce a warning?
> > >
> > > nconway=# create table a (b int4 unique);
> > > NOTICE: CREATE TABLE / UNIQUE will create implicit index "a_b_key" for
> > > table "a"
> > > CREATE TABLE
> > > nconway=# create table c (d int8 references a (b));
> > > NOTICE: CREATE TABLE will create implicit trigger(s) for FOREIGN KEY
> > > check(s)
> > > CREATE TABLE
> >
> > I don't think so. We don't produce warnings in other cases of potential
> > index mismatches either.
> >
>
> In all this discussion of NOTICE vs. WARNING, can someone remind me the
> logic for INFO? I can't seem to recall the differentiator there either.

Right now I see INFO being used mostly for vacuum status.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2003-09-05 22:09:01 Re: FK type mismatches?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-09-05 21:57:37 Re: Examining the output of: ldd `which postgres`