Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Recognize functional dependency on primary keys.

Tom Lane wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:7305.1281792213@sss.pgh.pa.us" type="cite"><pre wrap="">Bruce Momjian <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"href="mailto:bruce@momjian.us"><bruce@momjian.us></a> writes: </pre><blockquote
type="cite"><prewrap="">OK, I put it back, but I still feel we might not need it anymore.   </pre></blockquote><pre
wrap="">
Even if you're willing to believe that the questions will stop once
we have this feature, that won't happen for more than a year. </pre></blockquote><br /> As a general comment on this,
I'vegotten two rounds of complaints about MySQL migrations bit by this problem in the last year, and I found it handy
topoint them to the FAQ entry.  Even if one of the forms starts to work in 9.1 eventually, I'd like to see a comment
aboutthis issue hang around somewhere for future reference.  Note that in both cases the whole operation involved was
ratherbrain dead and returning silly indeterminate results in MySQL, but they didn't realize it.  No objections to the
PostgreSQL"limitation" once they understood it was fixing a subtle bug in the original too.<br /><br /> I was thinking
ofadding this one as an example for my next MySQL vs. PostgreSQL paper update, it's a great example of the focus on
correctnessdifferences between the two databases.<br /><br /><pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
 
Greg Smith  2ndQuadrant US  Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:greg@2ndQuadrant.com">greg@2ndQuadrant.com</a>   <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"href="http://www.2ndQuadrant.us">www.2ndQuadrant.us</a>
 
</pre>