Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: PRIMARY KEY on a *group* of columns imply that each column is NOT - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Stephane Bortzmeyer
Subject Re: PRIMARY KEY on a *group* of columns imply that each column is NOT
Date
Msg-id 20050427071211.GA1436@nic.fr
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PRIMARY KEY on a *group* of columns imply that each  (Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>)
Responses Re: PRIMARY KEY on a *group* of columns imply that each  (Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>)
Re: PRIMARY KEY on a *group* of columns imply that each column is  (Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>)
Re: PRIMARY KEY on a *group* of columns imply that each  (Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com>)
Re: PRIMARY KEY on a *group* of columns imply that each column is NOT  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
Tree view 
On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 03:48:44PM -0500,
 Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com> wrote
 a message of 26 lines which said:

> Here's a quote from the SQL1992 spec that's VERY clear:

Yes, PostgreSQL is right and implement the standard. Now, what's the
rationale for the standard? I understand it for a single column but,
for several columns, it should be still possible to have different
tuples, such as (3, NULL) and (5, NULL) for instance.

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Hubert Fröhlich
Date:
Subject: Re: oid wraparound
Next
From: John Barham
Date:
Subject: Why sequential scan for currval?