Re: BUG #6226: Broken foreign key stored on database (parent deleted with children still readable, BUG#6225 Update)

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Daniel Cristian Cruz <danielcristian(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Pg Bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BUG #6226: Broken foreign key stored on database (parent deleted with children still readable, BUG#6225 Update)
Date: 2011-10-05 14:57:54
Message-ID: 1317826416-sup-836@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs


Excerpts from Daniel Cristian Cruz's message of mié oct 05 10:00:36 -0300 2011:
> 2011/9/26 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
>
> >
> > Please see if bug #6123 applies to this case.
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org/msg181541.html
>
>
> I guess, yes, it's related, because we had a trigger that deletes a row,
> while other foreign key constraint is updating the row setting null.
>
> But the thread is almost a book, and I am confused. It's a bug or do I need
> to change my schema?

Well, some people say it's a bug, others say it's not; and even if it
is, changing it means backwards incompatible behavior, so *if* it is
patched, it will only change the behavior on a future release, not
whatever you're using.

> Where can I change it to avoid it?

I don't know enough about the problem to help you there, sorry.

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-10-05 15:23:15 Re: BUG #6240: About - postgreswdinit.sql
Previous Message Pavel Holec 2011-10-05 13:37:54 Re: BUG #6233: pg_dump hangs with Access Violation C0000005