Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 9:04 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Attached patch applied to HEAD and 9.0.X.
>
> The patch you attached looks like it's a fix for the -bugs thread
> about "inappropriate reference to boolean logic", not the complaint
> raised in this thread.
I see
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 9:04 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Attached patch applied to HEAD and 9.0.X.
The patch you attached looks like it's a fix for the -bugs thread
about "inappropriate reference to boolean logic", not the complaint
raised in this thread.
Josh
--
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list
Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Jack Douglas wrote:
>
> > There are two kinds of people on this earth, those who understand
> > boolean arithmatic and those who don't. I'm not one of them.
>
> Hmmm... From that, I don't know if you do. Which do I record in the
> understands_boolean column of the dat
Em 06-05-2011 21:18, Tom Lane escreveu:
I also tend to agree with Alvaro that a lot of the stuff that falls on
the "client" side of the fence when using the strict "can it be executed
remotely" test
I think this idea is strict from docs [1] ("The common feature of these
applications is that the
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/sql-altertable.html
"To add a foreign key constraint to a table:
ALTER TABLE distributors ADD CONSTRAINT distfk FOREIGN KEY (address)
REFERENCES addresses (address) MATCH FULL;"
This looks confusing to me. Is "MATCH FULL" works with non-composite
(one ad
"NOTE 30 — If MATCH FULL or MATCH PARTIAL is specified for a
referential constraint and if the referencing table has only one
column specified in for that
referential constraint, or if the referencing table has more than one
specified column for that , but
none of those columns is nullable, then t
