> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I just noticed you can do this:
> > create table blah (
> > a not null references test on delete set null
> > )
>
> > Should that be prevented?
>
> It already does. Or did you mean disallow the declaration? I can't see
> anything in
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 21:23:01 -0800,
> Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> >
> > > I just noticed you can do this:
> > >
> > > create table blah (
> > > a not null references te
On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 21:23:01 -0800,
Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
>
> > I just noticed you can do this:
> >
> > create table blah (
> > a not null references test on delete set null
> > )
> >
> > Should that be prevented
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I just noticed you can do this:
> create table blah (
> a not null references test on delete set null
> )
> Should that be prevented?
It already does. Or did you mean disallow the declaration? I can't see
anything in SQL92 that recom
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> I just noticed you can do this:
>
> create table blah (
> a not null references test on delete set null
> )
>
> Should that be prevented? It shouldn't be too hard to test for really...
Maybe, although I don't think the spec prevents it
I just noticed you can do this:
create table blah (
a not null references test on delete set null
)
Should that be prevented? It shouldn't be too hard to test for really...
Chris
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists
