Re: Extra check in 9.0 exclusion constraint unintended consequences

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Abel Abraham Camarillo Ojeda <acamari(at)verlet(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Extra check in 9.0 exclusion constraint unintended consequences
Date: 2011-07-09 15:29:58
Message-ID: 1310225398.3012.236.camel@jdavis
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 2011-07-08 at 22:51 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I'm wondering if we might want to call this out with a <note> or
> similar... especially if we're only going to put it into the 9.0
> docs.

Sure, sounds good.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Yeb Havinga 2011-07-09 15:45:34 Re: Parameterized aggregate subquery (was: Pull up aggregate subquery)
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2011-07-09 15:29:26 Re: [HACKERS] Creating temp tables inside read only transactions