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.
In response to
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 |