2012/4/14 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 10:43 PM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
Yeah. I think it would be a good idea for UPDATE and DELETE to expose
a LIMIT option, but I can't really see the virtue in making that
functionality available only
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 3:27 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote:
It has a lot of sense. Without it, it's very difficult to do logical
replication on a table with no primary key.
(Whether or not people should create such tables in the first place
is, of course, beside the point.)
On lör, 2012-04-14 at 08:23 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 3:27 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
It has a lot of sense. Without it, it's very difficult to do logical
replication on a table with no primary key.
(Whether or not people should create such
2012/4/14 Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net:
On lör, 2012-04-14 at 08:23 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 3:27 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
It has a lot of sense. Without it, it's very difficult to do logical
replication on a table with no primary key.
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On lör, 2012-04-14 at 08:23 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 3:27 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com
wrote:
It has a lot of sense. Without it, it's very difficult to do logical
replication on
