Re: Another unexpected behaviour

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Samuel Hwang <samuel(at)replicon(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Another unexpected behaviour
Date: 2011-07-20 15:55:26
Message-ID: CA+U5nM+tKNQyAv9=nQcpiT3B4eJZssQhrdOfP3fsiBWzWZxqnA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Samuel Hwang <samuel(at)replicon(dot)com> wrote:

> The real question is that why PostgreSQL behaves differently than
> other major DBMS. IMHO, doing checking at set operation boundary is
> more appropriate than at row boundary.

The real question is why anyone would actually perform that kind of
UPDATE. It doesn't really make much sense to increment a PK value.

PostgreSQL is good at supporting things people want and need, so
differences do exist in places that are fairly low priority.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Shianmiin 2011-07-20 16:46:21 Re: Another unexpected behaviour
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-07-20 15:51:49 Re: Another unexpected behaviour