Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Partitioning feature ...

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Emmanuel Cecchet <manu(at)asterdata(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Nikhil Sontakke <nikhil(dot)sontakke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, Kedar Potdar <kedar(dot)potdar(at)gmail(dot)com>, Emmanuel Cecchet <Emmanuel(dot)Cecchet(at)asterdata(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Amit Gupta <amit(dot)pc(dot)gupta(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Partitioning feature ...
Date: 2009-03-31 17:16:49
Message-ID: 49D25001.5080003@agliodbs.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 3/31/09 9:45 AM, Emmanuel Cecchet wrote:
> Yes, there is a good reason. As a trigger can update the tuple value,
> this can change the routing decision. If you have a user trigger that
> tries to change the key value after the partition choice has been made,
> this will lead to an integrity constraint violation which is probably
> not what the user expects.

Actually, it's worse.  Depending on the timing of the triggers, it's 
possible to bypass the FK check entirely, and you can end up with 
inconsistent data.

--Josh

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: justinDate: 2009-03-31 17:44:19
Subject: Re: string_to_array with empty input
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2009-03-31 17:14:20
Subject: Re: can't load plpython

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group