Florian G. Pflug a écrit :
Dave Page wrote:
Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
Hi,
When someone set a default value for a column and set NOT NULL at the
same time, the query could fail if the table already contains NULL
values for this column. This patch adds an UPDATE statement to put
the DEFAULT value in this column for all NULL values (but only when
you SET NULL and SET DEFAULT the column at the same time).
I've done this patch for a friend but I don't quite like this patch
because of its behaviour. It doesn't warn the user. I think it would
be better to show a dialog telling that an UPDATE statement will be
executed because otherwise the whole action could fail.
So here are some questions :
* do you think this patch is worth it ?
I'm not keen on the idea.I prefer to leave that sort of behaviour to
the server, *if* thats the way it gets written.
You could first execute "alter table .. set default ...; alter table
..set not null" first, and only if the "set not null" fails ask the user
if he wants
the update to be performed. I personally would like the feature I think,
though I can easily live without it ;-)
Perhaps we can do this with a better error message.
There's something I really like with EMS SQL Manager. When the user
change a property, the SQL is shown and can be changed. If the COMMIT
failed, they show you the SQL and it also can be modified. Perhaps we
just need this ? When there is a PostgreSQL related error message,
pgAdmin shows the SQL it tried to execute and let the user change it. I
think it would be a better behavior than what my patch implied. Would
something like this be possible ? And one more question, I wonder why
the SQL tab is not editable ? I can think of one reason but I'm not sure :)
Regards.
--
Guillaume.
<!-- http://abs.traduc.org/
http://lfs.traduc.org/
http://docs.postgresqlfr.org/ -->
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
