|
Tom Lane wrote: Ah, sorry if this was unclear. #2 would mean that the column definition has an explicit "update default", which could potentially be different from the "insert default", if that was desired. The "slightly different approach" would mean that explicit SET to DEFAULT instructions would just use the insert default. I was just unsure whether it would be useful in practice to have separate values for the explicit update default and the insert default.Brendan Jurd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Agreed, UPDATE SET x = DEFAULT isn't a good solution for the last modtime column. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't be useful in other situations. Sounds good -- column based privileges would have a lot of handy applications.In fact, you really don't want ordinary users to be able to set the column at all. If we had per-column privilege controls (which the spec says we should, and I think we will eventually) then disallowing write of the modtime column to ordinary users, along with an update default _expression_, would get the job done very nicely. Cheers BJ regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend |
- Re: [GENERAL] Touch row ? Mike Mascari
- Re: [GENERAL] Touch row ? Tom Lane
- Re: [GENERAL] Touch row ? Eric B . Ridge
- Re: [GENERAL] Touch row ? Tom Lane
- Re: [GENERAL] Touch row ? Eric Ridge
- Re: [GENERAL] Touch row ? Tom Lane
- Re: [GENERAL] Touch row ? Eric Ridge
- Re: [GENERAL] Touch row ? Chris Travers
- Update Default (was: [GENERAL] Touch row ?) Brendan Jurd
- Re: Update Default (was: [GENERAL] Touch row ?) Tom Lane
- Brendan Jurd
