Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD9E9633A87 for ; Mon, 1 Feb 2010 09:31:09 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 79305-05 for ; Mon, 1 Feb 2010 13:30:58 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-ew0-f222.google.com (mail-ew0-f222.google.com [209.85.219.222]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C745632FE5 for ; Mon, 1 Feb 2010 09:30:58 -0400 (AST) Received: by ewy22 with SMTP id 22so262239ewy.34 for ; Mon, 01 Feb 2010 05:30:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:cc:content-type; bh=wSN28yMH0RhmoZx5jVjkkQTuG17m1EL1jER3m6aW09s=; b=l5vTzE9CcdAVyb48fgLnRxt9dXG55LJp9L/yJP5vx3X17sMJk1jXq8dQHyTi8AaUp0 ohbOeiYDkFRdbwkDQw7XqNjv9Fkuzmq8amJsfQ5AsFrm3mxbNtfihxJ3jhUa29GSGCNd kbqJPoDAH+N66ue1OnsYQ3y4ZKzjyQzI1bUaw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:cc :content-type; b=EXfJ6vu1LrK59B3xqpZ00Um9UgkfVRI2NK6aIDLhp+zGU5cBagp5DLooL+DpJSAu4j Zk1b3lN+znv4IbPGzTUK20P0/s3ygr54UjmTew9yU0WtZUZvpQiuWxfSlH1ks4V0uxKD 0vVphYLzIOWtBF+ilB9a9kic03XQ5fAl00x4U= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.213.96.198 with SMTP id i6mr4097915ebn.45.1265031057067; Mon, 01 Feb 2010 05:30:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <407d949e1001291830v5245c2bbhebd14dc0e183eb1@mail.gmail.com> References: <331e40661001280321ka774d66j8594e2b3fb2c2b8b@mail.gmail.com> <407d949e1001291830v5245c2bbhebd14dc0e183eb1@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 15:30:57 +0200 Message-ID: <331e40661002010530u5c03068ek9878037344e23178@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Constraint propagating for equal fields From: =?KOI8-U?B?96bUwcymyiD0yc3eydvJzg==?= Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c5be5ec94da3047e89fe26 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.183 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_05=-1.11, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MISSING_HEADERS=1.292 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201002/1 X-Sequence-Number: 37422 --001636c5be5ec94da3047e89fe26 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-U Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 30 =D3=A6=DE=CE=D1 2010 =D2. 04:30 Greg Stark =CE=C1=D0= =C9=D3=C1=D7: > 2010/1/28 =F7=A6=D4=C1=CC=A6=CA =F4=C9=CD=DE=C9=DB=C9=CE > > > > I've always thought that PostgreSQL would propagate constraint from > field1 to field2 if condition says field1=3Dfield2, but this does not see= m the > case: > > version? > > PostgreSQL 8.3.7 on amd64-portbld-freebsd7.2, compiled by GCC cc (GCC) 4.2.= 1 20070719 [FreeBSD] --001636c5be5ec94da3047e89fe26 Content-Type: text/html; charset=KOI8-U Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

30 =D3=A6=DE=CE=D1 2010 =D2. 04:30 Greg = Stark <gsstark@mit.= edu> =CE=C1=D0=C9=D3=C1=D7:
tivv00@gmail.com>
>
> I've always thought that PostgreSQL would propagate constraint fro= m field1 to field2 if condition says field1=3Dfield2, but this does not see= m the case:

version?

=9A
PostgreSQL 8.3.7 on amd64-portbld-freeb= sd7.2, compiled by GCC cc (GCC) 4.2.1 20070719 =9A[FreeBSD]=9A
--001636c5be5ec94da3047e89fe26--