On 06/14/07 02:24, PFC wrote:
The DELETE should block, no?
Why ?
Foreign keys put an ON DELETE trigger on the referenced table
Foreign keys that silently, automatic DELETE records?
Did I read that correctly?
Isn't that the point of ON DELETE CASCADE ?
Where'd that come from
The DELETE should block, no?
Why ?
Foreign keys put an ON DELETE trigger on the referenced table
Foreign keys that silently, automatic DELETE records?
Did I read that correctly?
Isn't that the point of ON DELETE CASCADE ?
besides checking the referencing column on insert/
Kevin Hunter wrote:
> At 3:26p -0400 on 13 Jun 2007, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
>>> The way that I currently know how to do this in Postgres is with
>>> PLpgSQL functions. Then I add something like
>>>
>>> CONSTRAINT away_team_is_playing CHECK ( NOT teamIsPlaying(
>>> awayteamid, timeid ) )
>>>
>
On 06/13/07 17:23, PFC wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 00:09:20 +0200, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On 06/13/07 16:59, PFC wrote:
Isn't it *supposed* to mis UNcommitted changes from other transactions?
Well, if the "uncommited change" is a DELETE of the row that
allowed the constra
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 00:09:20 +0200, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On 06/13/07 16:59, PFC wrote:
Isn't it *supposed* to mis UNcommitted changes from other transactions?
Well, if the "uncommited change" is a DELETE of the row that
allowed the constraint check to pass, then when
On 06/13/07 16:59, PFC wrote:
Isn't it *supposed* to mis UNcommitted changes from other transactions?
Well, if the "uncommited change" is a DELETE of the row that allowed
the constraint check to pass, then when this delete is commited, your
data is no longer consistent.
The DELETE shoul
Isn't it *supposed* to mis UNcommitted changes from other transactions?
Well, if the "uncommited change" is a DELETE of the row that allowed the
constraint check to pass, then when this delete is commited, your data is
no longer consistent.
Consider this :
CREATE TABLE A( attribu
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Hunter
>Sent: woensdag 13 juni 2007 22:03
>To: Stefan Kaltenbrunner
>Cc: PostgreSQL General List
>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] pointer to feature comparisons, please
>
>At
On 06/13/07 15:02, Kevin Hunter wrote:
[snip]
'To enforce this rule without integrity constraints, you can use a
trigger to query the department table and test that each new employee's
department is valid. But this method is less reliable than the integrity
constraint. SELECT in Oracle Databa
At 3:26p -0400 on 13 Jun 2007, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
The way that I currently know how to do this in Postgres is with
PLpgSQL functions. Then I add something like
CONSTRAINT away_team_is_playing CHECK ( NOT teamIsPlaying
( awayteamid, timeid ) )
to the table schema.
well doing it t
Kevin Hunter wrote:
[...]
> I originally had him code his project for Postgres, but for reasons
> beyond our control we've had to move to Oracle. In designing the schema
> we have need of a constraint that checks values in other tables. The
> way that I currently know how to do this in Postgres
http://troels.arvin.dk/db/rdbms/ is where I go when I have to figure out
how to cope with someone's MySQL mess [this week: it lets you put an
arbitrary integer into a boolean column? seriously?]; it's also handy for
comparing against Oracle.
There is a helpful table
http://www-css.fnal.gov/
On Jun 13, 8:57 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Hunter) wrote:
> So, motivation aside, what I'm wanting is a couple of pointers to
> feature comparisons of Postgres vs Oracle. What else is going to
> bite him while he works on this project? Would be handy to have this
> reference since neither of us
Hello List,
Short version: I want pointers to feature comparisons of Postgres vs
Oracle. Can the list help?
Long version:
I'm working with a student on a project for school. I'm trying to
teach "right" methods of thinking and doing things, such as making
the database/data model the au
14 matches
Mail list logo
