On Sun, Jan 06, 2008 at 04:07:40PM +0000, Gregory Stark wrote:
> "Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Louis-David Mitterrand wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I changed the data type on a column (to an enum) but the previous foreign
> >> key
> >> to the old table (replaced by the enum) is still accepted event though the
> >> data types are now different. Is that the expected behavior?
> >>
> >> CREATE TABLE person_to_event (
> >> id_person integer NOT NULL,
> >> id_event integer NOT NULL,
> >> person_type person_type_new NOT NULL, -- new ENUM type
> >> "character" text
> >> )
> >>
> >> ALTER TABLE ONLY person_to_event
> >> ADD CONSTRAINT person_to_event_person_type_fkey FOREIGN KEY
> >> (person_type) REFERENCES person_type(person_type); -- old person_type
> >> table, text column
> >
> > Please send us a more complete example. Also, using the same name for a
> > table,
> > a field and a type makes reading it very confusing. Please make sure your
> > example uses names for just one purpose.
>
> (Well you can't use the same name for a table and a type since a table defines
> a type of that name implicitly.)
>
> I think what's missing here is the definition of the person_type table. Your
> comment says "text column" but I get this with a text column target:
>
> postgres-# ERROR: foreign key constraint "person_to_event_person_type_fkey"
> cannot be implemented
> DETAIL: Key columns "person_type" and "person_type" are of incompatible
> types: person_type_new and text.
>
> I get the same thing if it's an integer field.
I jumped the gun a bit too fast (should refrain from working on sundays
before a good nap). You are of course right. As I said in a previous
message, I was positive the person_type.person_type was still text even
though I had changed it to the same enum (and forgot about it).
Thanks for your answer and time,
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
