Dear Tom,
On Tue, 6 Nov 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 10:05:58 -0500
> From: Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Rick Gigger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> pgsql-hackers lis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> IIUC, I have drop every trigger like this :
> SELECT t.tgname, c.relname, tgconstrname FROM pg_trigger t, pg_class c
> WHERE t.tgrelid = c.oid AND tgname like 'RI_ConstraintTrigger_%'AND
> tgconstrname = '';
> and I delete all those ancient foreign key WITHOUT disturbi
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> I'd love to find a query against pg_triggers giving the table name for
>> each RI_ConstraintTrigger_xxx.
> SELECT t.tgname, c.relname, tgconstrname FROM pg_trigger t, pg_class c
> WHERE t.tgrelid = c.oid AND tgname like
On Tue, 6 Nov 2007, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 13:07:23 +
> From: Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rick Gigger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd love to find a query against pg_triggers giving the table name for
each RI_ConstraintTrigger_xxx.
SELECT t.tgname, c.relname, tgconstrname FROM pg_trigger t, pg_class c
WHERE t.tgrelid = c.oid AND tgname like 'RI_ConstraintTrigger_%';
--
Heikki Linnakangas
E
On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 15:53:10 -0500
> From: Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Rick Gigger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> S
Ah, yes it was the quotes. I guess that makes me a newbie. :)
On Nov 5, 2007, at 1:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rick Gigger wrote:
Doesn't DROP TRIGGER require the name of the trigger? He says
they are
unnamed. How then does he drop them?
The
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Rick Gigger wrote:
>> Doesn't DROP TRIGGER require the name of the trigger? He says they are
>> unnamed. How then does he drop them?
> They're not really unnamed. pg_dump just replaces the real name with
> "".
And \d will show the real names of
Rick Gigger wrote:
Doesn't DROP TRIGGER require the name of the trigger? He says they are
unnamed. How then does he drop them?
They're not really unnamed. pg_dump just replaces the real name with
"".
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Doesn't DROP TRIGGER require the name of the trigger? He says they
are unnamed. How then does he drop them?
On Nov 5, 2007, at 6:31 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, 4 Nov 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
So you have a *bunch* of partially broken FK constraints in that
source
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On Sun, 4 Nov 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
>> So you have a *bunch* of partially broken FK constraints in that source
>> database.
> I just talk to my customer and he/we'll make a big batch deleting and
> recreating all foreign keys on 8.2.5.
> The question is, how do we get r
Hi Tom
On Sun, 4 Nov 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 19:47:04 -0500
> From: Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] should I worry?
>
> I wrote:
> > Hmm, this is messier th
I wrote:
>> Hmm, this is messier than I thought. What evidently has happened is
>> that at one time or another, one of the two tables involved in an FK
>> relationship has been dropped and re-created. If you'd had proper
>> FK constraints the constraints would have gone away cleanly, but with
>>
I wrote:
> Hmm, this is messier than I thought. What evidently has happened is
> that at one time or another, one of the two tables involved in an FK
> relationship has been dropped and re-created. If you'd had proper
> FK constraints the constraints would have gone away cleanly, but with
> these
> On Sun, 4 Nov 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Would it be possible for you to send me (off-list) all of the CREATE
>> CONSTRAINT TRIGGER commands appearing in the dump?
> [done]
Hmm, this is messier than I thought. What evidently has happened is
that at one time or another, one of the two tables invo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I've tried it and got those logs:
BTW, is that a complete list of the NOTICEs you got? I'd expect to see
exactly two "ignoring" messages for each "converting" message, and it's
a bit worrisome that that's not what you seem to have.
Another thing that's strange is that
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I've got two problems:
> Looking at the errors, ISTM foreign statement is the over way round :
> levt_tevt_cod is in ligne_evt NOT in type_evt
No, that's just how we've worded FK violation errors for some time.
The real question is how did FK violations get into your d
Dear Tom,
On Sat, 3 Nov 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 21:21:20 -0400
> From: Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> pgsql-hackers list
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] should I worry?
>
&
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Is there a query I can use to know all the unamed trigger, delete them and
> recreate with the right sentence?
I've applied a patch that should persuade the backend to convert the old
CREATE CONSTRAINT TRIGGER commands into proper foreign-key constraints.
I'd suggest ap
On Sat, 3 Nov 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 12:42:24 -0400
> From: Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> pgsql-hackers list
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] should I worry?
>
> [EMAIL
et_position',
'objets', 'UNSPECIFIED', 'pobj_obj_cod', 'obj_cod');
This dump was generated by pg_dump 8.3beta1 against a 8.2.5 db
Best regardsb
On Fri, 2 Nov 2007, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 19:59:03 +
> From: Heikk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I'm confused, until I have clearence to send the schema, here are pg logs:
> Nov 3 14:44:20 sun postgres[17963]: [189-1] ERROR: trigger "" for
> relation "objets" already exists
> Nov 3 14:44:20 sun postgres[17963]: [189-2] STATEMENT: CREATE CONSTRAINT
> TRIGGER "
Hi Tom et all!
Thanks for your mails.
On Fri, 2 Nov 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 16:08:24 -0400
> From: Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> pgsql-hackers list
> Subject
Hi,
Le Friday 02 November 2007 21:08:24 Tom Lane, vous avez écrit :
> No, foreign-key triggers always have names too, and they don't look like
> that (they look like RI_ConstraintTrigger_nnn). I cannot find anyplace
> in PG that supplies "" as a default name for a trigger, either.
> So there's so
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> All triggers in the schema are named. So I assume they are triggers for
> foreign keys.
No, foreign-key triggers always have names too, and they don't look like
that (they look like RI_ConstraintTrigger_nnn). I cannot find anyplace
in PG that supplies "" as a default n
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2 Nov 2007, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 18:11:14 +
From: Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: pgsql-hackers list
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] should I worry?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm now testing
On Fri, 2 Nov 2007, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 18:11:14 +
> From: Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: pgsql-hackers list
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] should I worry?
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I'
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm now testing 8.3beta2 on a relatively big (10G) database.
I've tried with pg_dymp -Fc/pg_restore and pg_dump/pgsql and get those
errors:
Could you be a bit more specific? The database you tried to restore to
was empty, right? Can you post the dump file (schema-only)
Hi hackers,
I'm now testing 8.3beta2 on a relatively big (10G) database.
I've tried with pg_dymp -Fc/pg_restore and pg_dump/pgsql and get those
errors:
ERROR: trigger "" for relation "objets" already exists
ERROR: trigger "" for relation "perso_objets" already exists
ERROR: trigger "" for rela
29 matches
Mail list logo
