Re: Constraints/On Delete...
От | Stephan Szabo |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Constraints/On Delete... |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20030104091836.Y21507-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Constraints/On Delete... ("Boget, Chris" <chris@wild.net>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Boget, Chris wrote: > > ALTER TABLE "second" DROP CONSTRAINT "$1"; > > So the reason mine wasn't working (which looks exactly > like yours) is because there was the above constraint on > the table? What is the $1? How can I view the existing > constraints for any particular table? Not quite. In your example, you had foreign key (record_num) references "first"("record_num") which wasn't the correct column to be referencing from so the data didn't line up correctly. "$1" is the default name for the first unnamed check/fk constraint on the table (as of 7.3). and I think \d <table> will show the constraints now. > > No. Referential actions are applied on changes to the primary > > key side of the constraint (in this case "first"), so deletes > > from first cause actions on second. > > Ok, I just wanted to make sure. It just looked like it was the > other way around. Because it appeared that the pointer (the > "references") was going from "second" to "first". I guess that > when records are deleted from the "first", it asks what tables are > referencing one of it's columns and it's not that it implicitely > already knows..? When the constraint is added, triggers are added to first that do the action or check against second.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: