On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 11:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> IIRC, the name of an FK constraint also appears in the arguments for its
> triggers. If you didn't update those too, the behavior might be a bit
> inconsistent, depending on which PG version you're using. In particular
> I'm not sure which name
Csaba Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 12:11 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Csaba Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> Is this still safe to do ?
>>
>> What kind of constraint?
> The only ones left are foreign key constraints. I had a few not nulls
> too, but those are not actu
On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 12:11 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Csaba Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I found an old post regarding the subject, where modifying the
> > pg_constraint entry was recommended:
>
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2003-04/msg00339.php
>
> > Is this still safe to
Csaba Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I found an old post regarding the subject, where modifying the
> pg_constraint entry was recommended:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2003-04/msg00339.php
> Is this still safe to do ?
What kind of constraint?
regards,
I found an old post regarding the subject, where modifying the
pg_constraint entry was recommended:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2003-04/msg00339.php
Is this still safe to do ? The pertinent docs don't say anything pro or
contra:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/static/catalog-pg-
