On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 09:04:45PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
As others, I am concerned about people being confused when funny-looking
trigger names suddenly appearing when you disable all table triggers.
What I ended up doing is to create a user and internal section when
displaying
On 2014-02-24 12:45:12 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 09:04:45PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
As others, I am concerned about people being confused when funny-looking
trigger names suddenly appearing when you disable all table triggers.
What I ended up doing is to
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 07:09:29PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-02-24 12:45:12 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 09:04:45PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
As others, I am concerned about people being confused when funny-looking
trigger names suddenly appearing when
On 2014-02-24 13:16:39 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 07:09:29PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-02-24 12:45:12 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 09:04:45PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
As others, I am concerned about people being confused when
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
Thanks. It'd have been nice tho, to mention Fabrízio in the commit
message as the patch's author.
Uh, I was thinking of that, but I basically rewrote the patch from
scratch and changed its visible behavior, so
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 07:23:50PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-02-24 13:16:39 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 07:09:29PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-02-24 12:45:12 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 09:04:45PM -0500, Bruce Momjian
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:59:51PM -0200, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:37 PM, fabriziomello fabriziome...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 2013-09-18 15:15:55 +0200, Bernd Helmle wrote:
On 2013-09-18 15:15:55 +0200, Bernd Helmle wrote:
--On 18. September 2013 13:52:29
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:04 AM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:59:51PM -0200, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:37 PM, fabriziomello fabriziome...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 2013-09-18 15:15:55 +0200, Bernd Helmle wrote:
On
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:37 PM, fabriziomello fabriziome...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 2013-09-18 15:15:55 +0200, Bernd Helmle wrote:
On 2013-09-18 15:15:55 +0200, Bernd Helmle wrote:
--On 18. September 2013 13:52:29 +0200 Andres Freund
lt;andres@gt; wrote:
If you do ALTER TABLE ...
On 2013-09-18 15:15:55 +0200, Bernd Helmle wrote:
On 2013-09-18 15:15:55 +0200, Bernd Helmle wrote:
--On 18. September 2013 13:52:29 +0200 Andres Freund
lt;andres@gt; wrote:
If you do ALTER TABLE ... DISABLE TRIGGER ALL; and then individually
re-enable the disabled triggers it's easy
Hi,
If you do ALTER TABLE ... DISABLE TRIGGER ALL; and then individually
re-enable the disabled triggers it's easy to miss internal triggers.
A \d+ tablename will not show anything out of the ordinary for that
situation since we don't show internal triggers. But foreign key checks
won't work.
So,
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
So, how about displaying disabled internal triggers in psql?
+1
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to
--On 18. September 2013 13:52:29 +0200 Andres Freund
and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
If you do ALTER TABLE ... DISABLE TRIGGER ALL; and then individually
re-enable the disabled triggers it's easy to miss internal triggers.
A \d+ tablename will not show anything out of the ordinary for that
On 2013-09-18 15:15:55 +0200, Bernd Helmle wrote:
--On 18. September 2013 13:52:29 +0200 Andres Freund
and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
If you do ALTER TABLE ... DISABLE TRIGGER ALL; and then individually
re-enable the disabled triggers it's easy to miss internal triggers.
A \d+ tablename
--On 18. September 2013 15:19:27 +0200 Andres Freund
and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Well, that will lead the user in the wrong direction, won't it? They
haven't disabled the constraint but the trigger. Especially as we
already have NOT VALID and might grow DISABLED for constraint
15 matches
Mail list logo
