Re: Trigger problem - conclusion

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Nikolay Grebnev <nikolaygrebnev(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Trigger problem - conclusion
Date: 2007-12-12 20:45:45
Message-ID: 47604879.10300@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Nikolay Grebnev wrote:
> Good Day,
>
> I recently posted a message here
> (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-12/msg00340.php)
> that the trigger does not work as it should from time to time. Now the
> trigger works on C, before It was on TCL and it had the same problem.
> As the trigger works all right in 99.999 % cases (or even more) then
> we can make a conclusion that the trigger is written all right. And it
> was written in complete accordance with the documentation that is
> possible to find.
> I suggest to write down in documentation for PostgreSQL, that during
> big loads triggers can fail in some cases.
>
>

I think you need to provide a reproducable, self-contained test case, if
possible.

Your previous mail said:

> In php where the queries are formed we see that the query is sent for
> execution and executed ant the base was modified, but the trigger
> seems just to skip it (does not work with the query).

It would be far better to check that the statement has executed in the
log, after turning on log_statement or log_min_duration_statement.

Does it fail in inserts, updates, deletes, or all three?

What platform are you using?

And why are you compiling with -O3?

cheers

andrew

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gavin Sherry 2007-12-12 20:46:16 Re: VLDB Features
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2007-12-12 20:25:56 Re: Slow PITR restore