Re: PGS 7.2 : Insert with wrong number of values did not - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Scott Marlowe
Subject Re: PGS 7.2 : Insert with wrong number of values did not
Date
Msg-id 1109004913.30529.62.camel@state.g2switchworks.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PGS 7.2 : Insert with wrong number of values did not  (Geoffrey KRETZ <gk@4js.com>)
Responses Re: PGS 7.2 : Insert with wrong number of values did not
List pgsql-general
On Mon, 2005-02-21 at 09:49, Geoffrey KRETZ wrote:
> Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 2005-02-21 at 09:38, Geoffrey KRETZ wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>I've got a question about a difference beetween PGS 7.2 and PGS 7.4
> >>behaviours.
> >>
> >>With PGS 7.2 :
> >> INSERT INTO table (col1, col2) VALUES (val1) doesn't fail
> >>
> >>With PGS 7.4 :
> >> INSERT INTO table (col1, col2) VALUES (val1) failed
> >>
> >>Is it a known bug ?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Yes, if 7.2 did that it WAS a known bug.  Fixed in 7.4.  It is illegal
> >to have unmatching numbers of columns in the insert list and the column
> >list.
> >
> >Did 7.2 really do that?
> >
> >
> >
>
> 7.1 do that and while testing recently, we found that in 7.2, it's the
> same behaviour. In 7.3, it's already ok.
>
> I've answer the question just to be sure that it's a postgresql bug.


Note that in the old version, postgresql would have inserted a default
value or a NULL if there was no default.  With the addition of the
DEFAULT keyword, you can get the same basic effect with:

insert into table (col1, col2) values (val1,DEFAULT);

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Unix Domain Socket Error
Next
From: Geoffrey KRETZ
Date:
Subject: Re: PGS 7.2 : Insert with wrong number of values did not