I`m sorry, but why work around?
The overhead of "99%" of cases is so bigger? What about an "option"
like constraint exclusion...
I've worked around also, but would like to see this topic in a TODO or
further implementation.
Thanks by patience.
Kevin Grittner escreveu:
Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Well, the way it is now is just broken, so IMO we have to either fix it
> > or remove it altogether.
>
> > Since having sequence_name in there doesn't let you do anything you
> > can't do without it, and there's no easy way to fi
"Michael Enke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> if I have defined my own data type/operators,
> in a check constraint this type is used
> instead of ::text.
It looks to me like you must have defined an operator =(varchar,testchar)
--- the only way a user-defined type would win over text is to have an
>>> On Sat, Oct 6, 2007 at 11:28 AM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been wondering
> if it would be worth the trouble to introduce scalarlesel and
> scalargesel estimators ...
FWIW, this is an issue we ran into:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-p
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 3659
Logged by: Michael Enke
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.1.4
Operating system: Linux, CentOS5
Description:should use implizit type cast in check constraint
Details:
Hello,
if I have
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 3658
Logged by: Alessandra Bilardi
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.1.9
Operating system: Linux version 2.6.18-4-vserver-amd64 (Debian
2.6.18.dfsg.1-12etch2)
Description:I've got disk-full
