Re: surprising trigger/foreign key interaction

From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: surprising trigger/foreign key interaction
Date: 2009-08-13 12:10:07
Message-ID: 4A84029F.7070603@kaltenbrunner.cc
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>> However I'm guessing that what actually happens is that heap_update is
>> returning HeapTupleSelfUpdated instead, which the code states as
>> /* nothing to do */.
>
> Yeah.
>
>> I imagine this is so because of some old fiddling to get semantics just
>> right for obscure corner cases, but it feels wrong nevertheless.
>
> I suspect it was reluctance to use the EvalPlanQual semantics (which
> are pretty bogus in their own way) for perfectly deterministic
> single-transaction cases.

still the current behaviour feels quite wrong because even after the
update the modified tuple still satisfies the WHERE clause of the DELETE
but still it won't actually get deleted.

Stefan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2009-08-13 14:03:36 Re: surprising trigger/foreign key interaction
Previous Message Michael Meskes 2009-08-13 11:33:19 Re: DECLARE doesn't set/reset sqlca after DECLARE cursor