Re: Renaming unnamed FK constraints
От | Vincent Frison |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Renaming unnamed FK constraints |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200604171832.35808.turman@ohmforce.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Renaming unnamed FK constraints (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Renaming unnamed FK constraints
|
Список | pgsql-novice |
Le Lundi 2006 Avril 17 18:12, Tom Lane a écrit : > Vincent Frison <turman@ohmforce.com> writes: > > Yes this is right on my current PG installation (7.4 on production > > server, 7.5 > > 7.5? There is no PG 7.5. Oops I was confused by the unstable Debian postgresql package whose version is 7.5 (but server parckage is 7.4). > > on my dev environnement): unnamed constraints are automaticely named with > > $1, $2, $3.. But it looks like it was not the case with ealier version > > isn't it? I say that because most of my tables was created 2 or 3 years > > ago (I don't remember exactly on which PG versions). For this old tables, > > I type "\d mytable" with psql there's no foreign-key constraints but only > > triggers related to referential integrity. > > Yeah, before about 7.3 there was no pg_constraint catalog and thus no > explicit representation of a foreign key constraint at all. I believe > that if you've just propagated a pre-7.3 schema forward via dump and > reload, you'll still have only the triggers and not any explicit > representation of the foreign key. This has nothing to do with the > syntax you used, though. Ok thanks a lot for this explanation! > My recommendation would be to drop all those old triggers and re-create > the foreign key constraints. Oh no! :( > You could try contrib/adddepend instead of > doing this by hand. What do you mean by contrib/adddepend? BTW a lot of people should have the same problem (i.e. tables creation with unamed constraints on PG < 7.3) shouldn't they?
В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления: