2011/6/16 Luiz K. Matsumura :
> Em 16/06/2011 16:39, Robert Haas escreveu:
>
> 2011/6/10 Luiz K. Matsumura :
>
> I need help to know if the follow scenario is a expected behaviour, a bug of
> postgres or a bug of slony:
>
> Postgres v8.4.8
> Slony-I v 2.0.5
>
> I have table replicated with slony an
Em 16/06/2011 16:39, Robert Haas escreveu:
2011/6/10 Luiz K. Matsumura:
I need help to know if the follow scenario is a expected behaviour, a bug of
postgres or a bug of slony:
Postgres v8.4.8
Slony-I v 2.0.5
I have table replicated with slony and that do some updates in another table
not re
Em 16/06/2011 19:17, Christopher Browne escreveu:
2011/6/10 Luiz K. Matsumura:
Hi,
I need help to know if the follow scenario is a expected behaviour, a bug of
postgres or a bug of slony:
Postgres v8.4.8
Slony-I v 2.0.5
I have table replicated with slony and that do some updates in another t
2011/6/10 Luiz K. Matsumura :
> Hi,
> I need help to know if the follow scenario is a expected behaviour, a bug of
> postgres or a bug of slony:
>
> Postgres v8.4.8
> Slony-I v 2.0.5
>
> I have table replicated with slony and that do some updates in another table
> not replicated.
>
> The trigger o
2011/6/10 Luiz K. Matsumura :
> I need help to know if the follow scenario is a expected behaviour, a bug of
> postgres or a bug of slony:
>
> Postgres v8.4.8
> Slony-I v 2.0.5
>
> I have table replicated with slony and that do some updates in another table
> not replicated.
>
> The trigger on repl
Hi,
I need help to know if the follow scenario is a expected behaviour, a
bug of postgres or a bug of slony:
Postgres v8.4.8
Slony-I v 2.0.5
I have table replicated with slony and that do some updates in another
table not replicated.
The trigger on replicated table was enabled on the slave
Chris Studholme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What follows is not necessarily a bug, but may be a misinterpretation of
> the SQL standard.
Yeah, it's a bug; the implementation of row comparisons in PG is
completely bogus. (The parser just expands it out to an AND clause
of scalar comparisons, whi
Hi,
What follows is not necessarily a bug, but may be a misinterpretation of
the SQL standard. I don't actually have a copy of the SQL standard, but I
am working from the book "A Guide to The SQL Standard, Fourth Edition" by
C.J. Date and Hugh Darwen. If you have this book handy, please refer to
On 18 Jul 2002, [ISO-8859-1] Stéphane Raimbault wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have the following tables :
> CREATE TABLE tournee (
>no_tournee SERIAL PRIMARY KEY);
>
> CREATE TABLE fab_tournee (
>id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
>id_fab INTEGER REFERENCES fabrication ON DELETE CASCADE,
>
Hi,
I have the following tables :
CREATE TABLE tournee (
no_tournee SERIAL PRIMARY KEY);
CREATE TABLE fab_tournee (
id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
id_fab INTEGER REFERENCES fabrication ON DELETE CASCADE,
no_tournee INTEGER REFERENCES tournee ON DELETE CASCADE);
When I insert
10 matches
Mail list logo
