Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
 
> What do you think of
> 
> ERROR: tuple to be updated was already modified by an operation
> triggered by the UPDATE command
> HINT: Consider using an AFTER trigger instead of a BEFORE trigger
> to propagate changes to other rows.
> 
> (s/update/delete/ for the DELETE case of course)
> 
> The phrase "triggered by" seems slippery enough to cover cases
> such as a volatile function executed by the UPDATE.  The HINT
> doesn't cover that case of course, but we have a ground rule that
> HINTs can be wrong.
 
Looks good to me.
 
-Kevin

In response to

• Re: Remembering bug #6123 at 2012-01-13 21:41:37 from Tom Lane

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Josh Berkus	Date: 2012-01-13 21:50:32
	Subject: 9.3 feature proposal: vacuumdb -j #
Previous:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2012-01-13 21:41:37
	Subject: Re: Remembering bug #6123