Re: Foreign keys / MATCH FULL, PARTIAL, etc.

From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: "Alexander Borkowski" <alexander(dot)borkowski(at)abri(dot)une(dot)edu(dot)au>, <pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Foreign keys / MATCH FULL, PARTIAL, etc.
Date: 2004-10-11 09:47:15
Message-ID: E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E4306A6B@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgadmin-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgadmin-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgadmin-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of
> Alexander Borkowski
> Sent: 11 October 2004 08:31
> To: pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: [pgadmin-hackers] Foreign keys / MATCH FULL, PARTIAL, etc.
>
> I don't know of how much help this is going to be, but the
> anwer to the question
>
> // MATCH FULL/PARTIAL missing; where is this stored?!?
>
> posed in pgForeignKey.cpp line 45 is: In
> pg_catalog.pg_trigger.tgargs.
> It is the third argument (zero based) to the ri-triggers, or
> more precisely the RI_MATCH_TYPE_ARGNO'th, cf.
> include/commands/trigger.h in the PostgreSQL 8.0 beta 3
> source (7.4 as well).

Ahh, thanks Alex. Iirc, that comment was written in 7.3 days when the
dcos said something like "There's MATCH FULL and MATCH PARTIAL which
isn't implemented yet", so it was probably ignored. Of course, there was
also MATCH SIMPLE, but it didn't have a name then, and cursory scan of
the docs probably wouldn't have registered it's existance :-(

I'll add a note to the todo.

Thanks, Dave.

Responses

Browse pgadmin-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message cvs 2004-10-11 11:21:29 CVS Commit by dpage: Don't save dialogue sizes or positions if maximised
Previous Message cvs 2004-10-11 09:46:50 CVS Commit by dpage: Updated TODO.