1. 28 11月, 2006 1 次提交
  2. 21 11月, 2006 1 次提交
  3. 24 10月, 2006 1 次提交
  4. 22 10月, 2006 1 次提交
  5. 17 10月, 2006 1 次提交
  6. 14 10月, 2006 1 次提交
  7. 21 9月, 2006 1 次提交
  8. 20 9月, 2006 1 次提交
    • N
      Improvements to the partitioning documentation. Original patch from Greg · c6217210
      Neil Conway 提交于
      Stark, additional fixes and editorialization by Neil Conway. Greg's patch
      description:
      
          Some more doc patches for partitioned tables. In particular replace
          the caveat that INCLUDING CONSTRAINTS doesn't exist and replace it
          with documentation of, well, INCLUDING CONSTRAINTS.
      
          Also, there was an instance of "LIKE WITH DEFAULTS" which is
          actually spelled "LIKE INCLUDING DEFAULTS".
      c6217210
  9. 06 9月, 2006 1 次提交
    • T
      Get rid of the separate RULE privilege for tables: now only a table's owner · 7bae5a28
      Tom Lane 提交于
      can create or modify rules for the table.  Do setRuleCheckAsUser() while
      loading rules into the relcache, rather than when defining a rule.  This
      ensures that permission checks for tables referenced in a rule are done with
      respect to the current owner of the rule's table, whereas formerly ALTER TABLE
      OWNER would fail to update the permission checking for associated rules.
      Removal of separate RULE privilege is needed to prevent various scenarios
      in which a grantee of RULE privilege could effectively have any privilege
      of the table owner.  For backwards compatibility, GRANT/REVOKE RULE is still
      accepted, but it doesn't do anything.  Per discussion here:
      http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-04/msg01138.php
      7bae5a28
  10. 14 7月, 2006 1 次提交
  11. 04 7月, 2006 1 次提交
  12. 02 7月, 2006 1 次提交
    • B
      ALTER TABLE ... ADD/DROPS INHERIT (actually INHERIT / NO INHERIT) · 8c092781
      Bruce Momjian 提交于
      Open items:
      
      There were a few tangentially related issues that have come up that I think
      are TODOs. I'm likely to tackle one or two of these next so I'm interested in
      hearing feedback on them as well.
      
      . Constraints currently do not know anything about inheritance. Tom suggested
        adding a coninhcount and conislocal like attributes have to track their
        inheritance status.
      
      . Foreign key constraints currently do not get copied to new children (and
        therefore my code doesn't verify them). I don't think it would be hard to
        add them and treat them like CHECK constraints.
      
      . No constraints at all are copied to tables defined with LIKE. That makes it
        hard to use LIKE to define new partitions. The standard defines LIKE and
        specifically says it does not copy constraints. But the standard already has
        an option called INCLUDING DEFAULTS; we could always define a non-standard
        extension LIKE table INCLUDING CONSTRAINTS that gives the user the option to
        request a copy including constraints.
      
      . Personally, I think the whole attislocal thing is bunk. The decision about
        whether to drop a column from children tables or not is something that
        should be up to the user and trying to DWIM based on whether there was ever
        a local definition or the column was acquired purely through inheritance is
        hardly ever going to match up with user expectations.
      
      . And of course there's the whole unique and primary key constraint issue. I
        think to get any traction at all on this you have a prerequisite of a real
        partitioned table implementation where the system knows what the partition
        key is so it can recognize when it's a leading part of an index key.
      
      Greg Stark
      8c092781
  13. 01 5月, 2006 1 次提交
  14. 23 4月, 2006 1 次提交
  15. 19 2月, 2006 1 次提交
  16. 13 2月, 2006 1 次提交
  17. 12 2月, 2006 1 次提交
  18. 05 2月, 2006 1 次提交
    • T
      Fix constraint exclusion to work in inherited UPDATE/DELETE queries · 38931274
      Tom Lane 提交于
      ... in fact, it will be applied now in any query whatsoever.  I'm still
      a bit concerned about the cycles that might be expended in failed proof
      attempts, but given that CE is turned off by default, it's the user's
      choice whether to expend those cycles or not.  (Possibly we should
      change the simple bool constraint_exclusion parameter to something
      more fine-grained?)
      38931274
  19. 23 12月, 2005 1 次提交
  20. 05 11月, 2005 2 次提交
  21. 04 11月, 2005 1 次提交
  22. 03 11月, 2005 1 次提交
  23. 02 11月, 2005 1 次提交
  24. 24 10月, 2005 1 次提交
  25. 13 8月, 2005 1 次提交
    • B
      Add documentation: · abecf1af
      Bruce Momjian 提交于
      >>>I think a more accurate description would be "permissions not
      >>>inherited by children," and that isn't necessarily a bug.
      >>
      >>I agree it may not be a bug - but it's more than the permissions not
      >>being inherited: the parent is affected.
      >
      >
      > Not really, once you understand what's happening.  Unless you use
      > FROM ONLY, selecting from the parent selects from the parent *and*
      > its children.  The parent itself isn't affected, as queries with
      > FROM ONLY should demonstrate.  I understand what you're saying --
      > that there's an apparent effect on the parent -- but there really
      > isn't.
      
      Sean Burlington
      abecf1af
  26. 12 8月, 2005 1 次提交
    • T
      Solve the problem of OID collisions by probing for duplicate OIDs · 721e5378
      Tom Lane 提交于
      whenever we generate a new OID.  This prevents occasional duplicate-OID
      errors that can otherwise occur once the OID counter has wrapped around.
      Duplicate relfilenode values are also checked for when creating new
      physical files.  Per my recent proposal.
      721e5378
  27. 14 7月, 2005 1 次提交
  28. 13 6月, 2005 1 次提交
  29. 13 3月, 2005 1 次提交
  30. 23 1月, 2005 1 次提交
  31. 17 1月, 2005 1 次提交
  32. 10 1月, 2005 1 次提交
  33. 08 1月, 2005 1 次提交
  34. 23 12月, 2004 1 次提交
  35. 14 12月, 2004 1 次提交
  36. 28 11月, 2004 1 次提交
  37. 15 11月, 2004 1 次提交
  38. 22 10月, 2004 1 次提交
    • T
      Disallow referential integrity actions from being deferred; only the · 12a47c6a
      Tom Lane 提交于
      NO ACTION check is deferrable.  This seems to be a closer approximation
      to what the SQL spec says than what we were doing before, and it prevents
      some anomalous behaviors that are possible now that triggers can fire
      during the execution of PL functions.
      Stephan Szabo.
      12a47c6a
  39. 09 8月, 2004 1 次提交