* Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> [Thu, 12 Feb 2009 10:54:34 -0500]:
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> Hmm, the first UPDATE should've blocked already. It should've fired
a
RI
> trigger to lock the parent tuple in shared mode, but it looks like
> that's not happening for some reason.
Read the special code in AfterTriggerSaveEvent. This behavior is
exactly what is expected --- since the referencing field didn't
change, only the second update attempt actually fires the trigger.
Why? The second update is identical to the first one.
What is the difference? Such behavior looks very strange.
For example I wrote before to Heikki Linnakangas that I expect
parent tuple will not be lock if
a) foreign key is not modified explicitly at all
b) new value of foreign key is the same as old (not changed).
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
