On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Samuel Gendler
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Scott Marlowe
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> > Jan Bakuwel writes:
>> >> Why-o-why have the PostgreSQL developers decided to do it this way...?
>> >
>> > Because sta
On 12/30/2011 7:31 PM, David Johnston wrote:
On Dec 30, 2011, at 21:53, John Poole wrote:
I am trying to create a custom data type for phone numbers where
I have a primary phone number and then an array of additional
phone numbers qualified by certain types.
Below is a set of SQL commands I
On Dec 30, 2011, at 21:53, John Poole wrote:
> I am trying to create a custom data type for phone numbers where
> I have a primary phone number and then an array of additional
> phone numbers qualified by certain types.
>
> Below is a set of SQL commands I used to set up my custom
> types. I a
I am trying to create a custom data type for phone numbers where
I have a primary phone number and then an array of additional
phone numbers qualified by certain types.
Below is a set of SQL commands I used to set up my custom
types. I am unable to insert into the array field and wonder
if I have
Hi,
Thanks for all having responded to my mail.
I understand there's no way around it at the moment so I'll have to
start writing some code to deal with this behaviour.
cheers!
Jan
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Jan Bakuwel writes:
> >> Why-o-why have the PostgreSQL developers decided to do it this way...?
> >
> > Because starting and cleaning up a subtransaction is an expensive thing.
> > If we
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jan Bakuwel writes:
>> Why-o-why have the PostgreSQL developers decided to do it this way...?
>
> Because starting and cleaning up a subtransaction is an expensive thing.
> If we had auto-rollback at the statement level, you would be paying that
Jan Bakuwel writes:
> Why-o-why have the PostgreSQL developers decided to do it this way...?
Because starting and cleaning up a subtransaction is an expensive thing.
If we had auto-rollback at the statement level, you would be paying that
overhead for every statement in every transaction, whether
Hi Leif,
On 30/12/11 22:44, Leif Biberg Kristensen wrote:
> Fredag 30. desember 2011 09.43.38 skrev Jan Bakuwel :
>
>> Would be nice to have an option in PostgreSQL something along the lines
>> of: 'abort-transaction-on-constraint-violation = false'
> That option is called MySQL with MyISAM
On Friday, December 30, 2011 06:26:19 AM John Fabiani wrote:
> Hi,
> I recall somewhere I saw a simple plpgsql function that returned a table
> with more than one record that did not use a defined type or a temp table (
> at least I think I did). Is it possible to create such a function that
> wil
On Friday, December 30, 2011 6:26:19 am John Fabiani wrote:
> Hi,
> I recall somewhere I saw a simple plpgsql function that returned a table
> with more than one record that did not use a defined type or a temp table
> ( at least I think I did). Is it possible to create such a function that
> will
John Fabiani wrote on 30.12.2011 15:26:
Hi,
I recall somewhere I saw a simple plpgsql function that returned a table with
more than one record that did not use a defined type or a temp table ( at
least I think I did). Is it possible to create such a function that will
return more than one record
Hi,
I recall somewhere I saw a simple plpgsql function that returned a table with
more than one record that did not use a defined type or a temp table ( at
least I think I did). Is it possible to create such a function that will
return more than one record and not require a record type or temp
Fredag 30. desember 2011 05.25.22 skrev Jan Bakuwel :
> Of course I can start testing existing values in the database before
> accepting them in the user interface but that's putting the horse behind
> the cart. I much rather use the constraints at the database level to
> tell me a particular upda
Marcin Mirosław wrote on 30.12.2011 12:07:
Would be nice to have an option in PostgreSQL something along the lines
of: 'abort-transaction-on-constraint-violation = false'
That option is called MySQL with MyISAM tables.
Not true.
Oracle and others (I believe at least DB2) behave such tha
W dniu 30.12.2011 12:03, Thomas Kellerer pisze:
> Leif Biberg Kristensen wrote on 30.12.2011 10:44:
>> Fredag 30. desember 2011 09.43.38 skrev Jan Bakuwel :
>>
>>> Would be nice to have an option in PostgreSQL something along the lines
>>> of: 'abort-transaction-on-constraint-violation = false'.
Leif Biberg Kristensen wrote on 30.12.2011 10:44:
Fredag 30. desember 2011 09.43.38 skrev Jan Bakuwel :
Would be nice to have an option in PostgreSQL something along the lines
of: 'abort-transaction-on-constraint-violation = false'
That option is called MySQL with MyISAM tables.
Not
Fredag 30. desember 2011 09.43.38 skrev Jan Bakuwel :
> Would be nice to have an option in PostgreSQL something along the lines
> of: 'abort-transaction-on-constraint-violation = false'
That option is called MySQL with MyISAM tables.
Seriously, if the user encounters a constraint violation
Hi David,
> Start a "savepoint" before each sub-update and rollback to the savepoint if
> the update fails, and then try again with different data. If it succeeds you
> then release the savepoint anad move on.
Yeah... not ideal in my case & will result in "messy" code...
Would be nice to hav
19 matches
Mail list logo
