Re: FW: Re: FW: Re: Shouldn;t this trigger be called? - Mailing list pgsql-general
From | stan |
---|---|
Subject | Re: FW: Re: FW: Re: Shouldn;t this trigger be called? |
Date | |
Msg-id | 20190916195543.GA16882@panix.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | FW: Re: FW: Re: Shouldn;t this trigger be called? (stan <stanb@panix.com>) |
Responses |
Re: FW: Re: FW: Re: Shouldn;t this trigger be called?
|
List | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 12:44:49PM -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 9/16/19 11:53 AM, stan wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 09:16:35PM -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote: > > > On 9/15/19 6:04 PM, stan wrote: > > > > On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 12:27:14PM -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote: > > > > > On 9/15/19 10:46 AM, stan wrote: > > > > > > Forgot to cc the list again. Have to look at settings in mutt. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What validity check? > > > > > > > > > > > > > The check to see if it is the type enum. > > > > > > > > > > This would get solved a lot quicker if full information was provided: > > > > > > 1) Schema of the table. > > > Including associated triggers > > > > > > 2) The actual check code. > > > > > > > OK, please let me know if what I put in my reply to Tom Lane is not sufficient. > > > > > It was not sufficient, you did not include the table schema or the check > code. OK, understood here is the table: /* Contains one record for each customer */ CREATE TABLE customer ( customer_key integer DEFAULT nextval('customer_key_serial') PRIMARY KEY , cust_no smallint NOT NULL UNIQUE , name varchar UNIQUE , c_type customer_type , location varchar , bill_address_1 varchar , bill_address_2 varchar , bill_city varchar , bill_state varchar(2) , bill_zip us_postal_code NOT NULL DEFAULT '00000', bill_country varchar , bill_attention varchar , bill_addresse varchar , ship_address_1 varchar , ship_address_2 varchar , ship_addresse varchar , ship_attention varchar , ship_city varchar , ship_state varchar(2) , ship_zip us_postal_code NOT NULL DEFAULT '00000', office_phone_area_code numeric(3), office_phone_exchange numeric(3), office_phone_number numeric(4), office_phone_extension numeric(4), cell_phone_area_code numeric(3), cell_phone_exchange numeric(3), cell_phone_number numeric(4), ship_phone_area_code numeric(3), ship_phone_exchange numeric(3), ship_phone_number numeric(4), ship_phone_extension numeric(4), fax_phone_area_code numeric(3), fax_phone_exchange numeric(3), fax_phone_number numeric(4), status activity_status NOT NULL DEFAULT 'ACTIVE', modtime timestamptz NOT NULL DEFAULT current_timestamp ); I am not certain what you mean by the check. As you can see, there is nor specific check clause. I was referring to the built in check of data being entered versus the legal values for the user defined type. Make sense? -- "They that would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin
pgsql-general by date: