It didn't conform because it wasn't enforced and clearly a bug snuck in there somewhere.
Since it happened in a giant 60,000 row CREATE TABLE FROM SELECT statement, debugging the why will take me quite a while. Adam K 2009/11/4 Darren Duncan <dar...@darrenduncan.net>: > Adam Kennedy wrote: >> >> I really want to see at least one release where it's optional, so >> there's a window of time for people to do optional upgrading, rather >> than immediately forcing everything to fail. > > I support your proposal, so go ahead as far as I'm concerned. Make a > 1.27-stable release now that has fk disabled (and ensure documentation is > appropriate about that), but everything else the same. > >> The foreign key support has already broken code of mine, I was using >> the SQLite foreign key constraint syntax, so that ORM code generators >> could detect the table relationships and generate various methods. > > I am curious though why your code broke. If you were using the foreign key > constraint syntax to indicate table relationships, then didn't your data > already conform to the constraints as well? If not then why? > > -- Darren Duncan > > _______________________________________________ > DBD-SQLite mailing list > DBD-SQLite@lists.scsys.co.uk > http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbd-sqlite > _______________________________________________ DBD-SQLite mailing list DBD-SQLite@lists.scsys.co.uk http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbd-sqlite