| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | Mark Dalphin <mdalphin(at)amgen(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [BUGS] UNIQUE constraint no longer works under 6.5.1 |
| Date: | 1999-08-14 14:46:31 |
| Message-ID: | 7425.934641991@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Mark Dalphin <mdalphin(at)amgen(dot)com> writes:
> Using the UNIQUE constraint in a TABLE definition no longer does anything.
Interesting. Playing with some variants of your example shows that
UNIQUE works fine *unless* there is another column marked PRIMARY KEY.
Then the UNIQUE constraint is ignored. Looks like a simple logic bug in
the table-definition expander.
A look at the CVS logs reveals this apparently related entry for
parser/analyze.c:
revision 1.102
date: 1999/05/12 07:17:18; author: thomas; state: Exp; lines: +68 -24
Fix problem with multiple indices defined if using column- and table-
constraints. Reported by Tom Lane.
Now, check for duplicate indices and retain the one which is a primary-key.
Thomas, do you recall what that was all about? I don't offhand...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 1999-08-14 15:17:59 | Re: [BUGS] UNIQUE constraint no longer works under 6.5.1 |
| Previous Message | Mark Dalphin | 1999-08-13 22:57:23 | UNIQUE constraint no longer works under 6.5.1 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 1999-08-14 14:50:49 | Re: [HACKERS] How to get 'psql -q' runs really quiet ? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 1999-08-14 14:27:57 | Re: [HACKERS] Aborted Transaction During Vacuum |