Re: [HACKERS] Foreign key bugs (Re: "New" bug?? Serious - crashes backend.)

From: JanWieck(at)t-online(dot)de (Jan Wieck)
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, ryan <ryan(at)bel(dot)bc(dot)ca>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)orgg
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Foreign key bugs (Re: "New" bug?? Serious - crashes backend.)
Date: 2000-07-11 18:47:52
Message-ID: 200007111847.UAA19282@hot.jw.home
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
>
> >> but a larger question is why the system let you drop a table that
> >> is the target of a referential integrity check (which I assume is
> >> what you did to get into this state).
>
> > For me too.
>
> What about renaming as opposed to dropping? Since the triggers are set
> up to use names rather than OIDs, seems like they are vulnerable to a
> rename. Maybe they should be using table OIDs in their parameter lists.
> (That'd make pg_dump's life harder however...)

That at least shows how he might have gotten there. And yes,
they need to either keep track of renamings or use OID's.

Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephan Szabo 2000-07-11 19:24:13 Re: Foreign key bugs (Re: [BUGS] "New" bug?? Serious - crashesbackend.)
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2000-07-11 16:03:57 Re: [HACKERS] Foreign key bugs (Re: "New" bug?? Serious - crashes backend.)

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mikheev, Vadim 2000-07-11 18:49:06 RE: Storage Manager (was postgres 7.2 features.)
Previous Message Prasanth A. Kumar 2000-07-11 18:46:23 Re: Slashdot discussion