From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
---|---|
To: | Bob Smith <bsmith(at)h-e(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Referential constraints in version 8 |
Date: | 2005-04-15 12:45:07 |
Message-ID: | 20050415124507.GA31521@dcc.uchile.cl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 12:31:28AM -0700, Bob Smith wrote:
> We have just finished upgrading Postgres from 7.2 to 8, and I must live
> right or something because there was only one glitch. When the dump
> from 7.2 was restored into 8, some foreign key references which should
> have been initially deferred had become non-deferrable. I had to
> re-define those references by dropping the corresponding triggers and
> using ALTER TABLE to put them back as foreign key constraints, which
> seems to have fixed the problem. However, those references which I
> re-defined now show up explicitly in the table descriptions as foreign
> key constraints, and the corresponding triggers are not listed. This
> is great since it makes the table descriptions much more intelligible,
> but my concern is that all the other references which I didn't
> re-define still show as triggers and not as foreign key constraints.
> Is this just a cosmetic issue with psql's table description, or is
> there actually a functional difference? Should I re-define all the
> other foreign key constraints to be safe?
I suggest you run contrib/adddepend against that database. It will try to
add the missing information to the system catalogs so that the FKs
appear as such and not triggers.
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[(at)]dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>)
"Uno puede defenderse de los ataques; contra los elogios se esta indefenso"
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marcin Giedz | 2005-04-15 12:52:35 | Out of memory problem. |
Previous Message | Marc Cousin | 2005-04-15 10:04:57 | Online backups and WAL |