| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Affan Salman" <affan(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Stephan Szabo" <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Deferred RI trigger for non-key UPDATEs and subxacts |
| Date: | 2007-07-16 06:54:08 |
| Message-ID: | 873azobzzj.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> "Affan Salman" <affan(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>> With some time to spare, I thought I'd submit a quick-fix patch to the
>> issue I reported here:
>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-07/msg00339.php
>
> I don't think this is right. If the original tuple was inserted by a
> subtransaction of our transaction, it will have been checked at
> subtransaction subcommit, no?
That doesn't sound right.
> RELEASE SAVEPOINT destroys a savepoint previously defined in the current
> transaction.
>
> Destroying a savepoint makes it unavailable as a rollback point, but it has
> no other user visible behavior.
On the other hand what happens if you have constraints not deferred, insert a
record, then set constraints deferred and update it?
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2007-07-16 06:58:49 | Re: Deferred RI trigger for non-key UPDATEs and subxacts |
| Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2007-07-16 04:28:55 | Re: HOT latest patch - version 8 |