Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Updates not atomic with respect to indexes

From: Ben Young <ben(at)transversal(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Updates not atomic with respect to indexes
Date: 2004-04-28 12:53:24
Message-ID: 200404281353.24643.ben@transversal.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general
On Wednesday 28 April 2004 13:37, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I believe this is meant to be covered by this TODO item:
>
> * Allow DEFERRABLE UNIQUE constraints
>
> because the real issue is that the uniqueness check occurs immediately
> rather than being deferred till end of statement or transaction.
>
> Dunno when it will rise to the top of anyone's priority list...
>
> 			regards, tom lane


Thanks for everyones responses. I guess for now I will just need to find a way 
around it. Looking forward to deferrable unique contraints though!

Ben


In response to

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Jeremy GodfreyDate: 2004-04-28 15:29:43
Subject: Calling a function that returns a cursor using libpq
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-04-28 12:37:51
Subject: Re: Updates not atomic with respect to indexes

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group