tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us (Tom Lane) writes:
> > But you really shouldn't need the old tuple to know this since none
> > of the columns present in the unique index are 'set' by the update?
> > I.e. the 'not changing the unique key part' is not data dependent,
> > it is guarantied by the form of the update statement.
> (a) that's even further upstream from the index AM, and (b) what about
> BEFORE triggers that change the tuple contents?
> regards, tom lane
Ok, I rest my case. I obviously don't know enough of the
postgres internals to suggest a usable solution for this
problem. Thanks for your quick answers.
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Greg Copeland||Date: 2002-09-12 15:19:00|
|Subject: Re: Schemas not available for pl/pgsql %TYPE....|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2002-09-12 14:47:15|
|Subject: Re: _bt_check_unique checks every row in table when doing update?? |