From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Berend Tober <btober(at)seaworthysys(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Preserving data after updates |
Date: | 2005-05-19 17:10:57 |
Message-ID: | 5462.1116522657@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Berend Tober <btober(at)seaworthysys(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hmm, it shouldn't do that ... and in a quick test here I couldn't
>> reproduce any such bug. What version of pg_dump are you using?
> Sorry I failed to specify. Production version is 7.3.1 (change is
> hard!), although I origianally worked out the implementation on version
> 8. I bet that is the problem.
The case I tested seems to work in 7.3 as well:
CREATE TABLE person (last_name varchar(24),
first_name varchar(24),
CONSTRAINT person_name_check CHECK (((last_name IS NOT NULL) OR
(first_name IS NOT NULL))));
CREATE TABLE person_change_history(
action VARCHAR(6),
update_date TIMESTAMP NOT NULL DEFAULT NOW(),
update_user NAME NOT NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_USER
) INHERITS (person);
pg_dump puts the CONSTRAINT only on person, as it should. I'm testing
7.3.10 but I don't see any changes in the 7.3 CVS log that look related.
Can you put together a reproducible test case?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-05-19 17:19:16 | Re: Postgres in government |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2005-05-19 17:07:54 | Re: Postgres in government |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Juan Pablo Espino | 2005-05-19 17:36:48 | C array from SQL array? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-19 16:57:09 | Re: Two-phase commit issues |