Re: concurent updates

From: "Len Morgan" <len-morgan(at)crcom(dot)net>
To: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: concurent updates
Date: 2001-07-26 20:56:51
Message-ID: 002301c11615$7f660040$0908a8c0@bstx.cc
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Unless you have over simplified your example, why do you have two tables?
Wouldn't:

create table table1 (id int primary key, col1 int, col2 int)

do the same thing in one table? I would think that ANY schema that has two
tables with the SAME primary key can be resolved to one table without losing
anything.

len morgan

> create table table1 (id int primary key, col1 int);
> create table table2 (id int primary key references table1(id), col2 int);
>
> and the 2 updates :
>
> 1) update table2 set id = 1001 where id = 1;
> 2) update table1 set id = 1001 where id = 1;
>
> i can't execute them separately because of an integrity constraint
> violation.
> i've got the same error in a BEGIN / COMMIT block containing the updates.
>
> Does any one see how two help me ?
>
> thanks.
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-07-26 20:59:06 Re: [SQL] Re: When PostgreSQL compliant JDBC 2.0?
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2001-07-26 20:37:21 RE: Re: What's going on here?