"Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -On [20030911 15:43], Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >We can't ALTER a table that's already in use when the first ALTER
> >starts, either --- its attempt to exclusive-lock the table will fail.
> >But once you get the exclusive lock, you c
-On [20030911 15:43], Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>We can't ALTER a table that's already in use when the first ALTER
>starts, either --- its attempt to exclusive-lock the table will fail.
>But once you get the exclusive lock, you can (in Postgres) perform
>a series of operations without fea
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> -On [20030909 00:42], Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> IIRC, Oracle does not have rollback-able DDL. That might imply that the
>> reason they have MODIFY CONSTRAINT is that in Oracle you can't use the
>> above way to eliminate the window.
-On [20030909 00:42], Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>IIRC, Oracle does not have rollback-able DDL. That might imply that the
>reason they have MODIFY CONSTRAINT is that in Oracle you can't use the
>above way to eliminate the window. Can you put ALTERs inside
>transactions at all in Oracle?
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I assume MODIFY would allow you to alter the constraint without
> > re-checking all the rows, as would be required by DROP/ADD. However, if
> > you are modifying the constraint, wouldn't we have to recheck all the
> > rows anyway.
>
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Oh, you bring up two important issues --- one is is the gap in time
> between the drop and the recreate. This case can be done by
> doing the query in a transaction --- the lock will exist until the
> transaction completes, and in fact, you can roll it b
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
> -On [20030908 22:42], Bruce Momjian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >I assume MODIFY would allow you to alter the constraint without
> >re-checking all the rows, as would be required by DROP/ADD. However, if
> >you are modifying the constraint, wouldn't we have to rech
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I assume MODIFY would allow you to alter the constraint without
> > re-checking all the rows, as would be required by DROP/ADD. However, if
> > you are modifying the constraint, wouldn't we have to recheck all th
"Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Because what I can imagine, and please correct me if I miss something in
> my thought pattern, you have a small gap between dropping a constraint
> and adding the new one allowing the possibility of missing checks.
I think, someone correct me i
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Because what I can imagine, and please correct me if I miss something in
> my thought pattern, you have a small gap between dropping a constraint
> and adding the new one allowing the possibility of missing checks.
If you're concerned about conc
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I assume MODIFY would allow you to alter the constraint without
> re-checking all the rows, as would be required by DROP/ADD. However, if
> you are modifying the constraint, wouldn't we have to recheck all the
> rows anyway.
Yeah. Rod's point about alt
-On [20030908 22:42], Bruce Momjian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>I assume MODIFY would allow you to alter the constraint without
>re-checking all the rows, as would be required by DROP/ADD. However, if
>you are modifying the constraint, wouldn't we have to recheck all the
>rows anyway. Of course,
Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > can someone add:
> > Add an ALTER TABLE MODIFY CONSTRAINT
> > item to the todo list?
>
> Why? For a constraint, it's not obvious what this would do for you that
> dropping and re-adding the constraint wouldn't do. In the pl
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> can someone add:
> Add an ALTER TABLE MODIFY CONSTRAINT
> item to the todo list?
Why? For a constraint, it's not obvious what this would do for you that
dropping and re-adding the constraint wouldn't do. In the places where
we support CREATE O
-On [20030908 20:52], Rod Taylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>This could be rather time consuming to actually write but having the
>ability to change foreign key on update / on delete modes without
>rechecking all of the data would be very useful.
I was more interested in this feature for CHECK con
On Mon, 2003-09-08 at 14:32, Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
> Hi people,
>
> can someone add:
>
> Add an ALTER TABLE MODIFY CONSTRAINT
>
> item to the todo list? I am even willing to pick this one up in a
> while, after I finish some other outstanding tasks.
This could be rather time consuming
Hi people,
can someone add:
Add an ALTER TABLE MODIFY CONSTRAINT
item to the todo list? I am even willing to pick this one up in a
while, after I finish some other outstanding tasks.
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven / asmodai
PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7 9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625
17 matches
Mail list logo
