"Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Louis-David Mitterrand wrote:
>> I changed the data type on a column (to an enum) but the previous foreign key
>> to the old table (replaced by the enum) is still accepted event though the
>> data types are now different. Is that the expected behavior?
>> CREATE TABLE person_to_event (
>> id_person integer NOT NULL,
>> id_event integer NOT NULL,
>> person_type person_type_new NOT NULL, -- new ENUM type
>> "character" text
>> ALTER TABLE ONLY person_to_event
>> ADD CONSTRAINT person_to_event_person_type_fkey FOREIGN KEY (person_type) REFERENCES person_type(person_type); -- old person_type table, text column
> Please send us a more complete example. Also, using the same name for a table,
> a field and a type makes reading it very confusing. Please make sure your
> example uses names for just one purpose.
(Well you can't use the same name for a table and a type since a table defines
a type of that name implicitly.)
I think what's missing here is the definition of the person_type table. Your
comment says "text column" but I get this with a text column target:
postgres-# ERROR: foreign key constraint "person_to_event_person_type_fkey" cannot be implemented
DETAIL: Key columns "person_type" and "person_type" are of incompatible types: person_type_new and text.
I get the same thing if it's an integer field.
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support!
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Louis-David Mitterrand||Date: 2008-01-06 16:12:00|
|Subject: Re: beta4 accepts foreign key of different type thancolumn|
|Previous:||From: Louis-David Mitterrand||Date: 2008-01-06 15:59:32|
|Subject: my bad (was: Re: beta4 accepts foreign key of different type thancolumn|