RE: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KEY

[Hiroshi Inoue]

> -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > "Hiroshi Inoue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > ISTM commands/trigger.c is broken. > > The behabior seems to be changed by recent changes made by Tom. > > Hm. I changed the code to not log an AFTER event unless there is > actually a trigger of the relevant type, thus suppressing what I > considered a very serious memory leak in the non-deferred-trigger case. > Are there cases where we must log an event anyway, and if so what are > they? It didn't look to me like the deferred event executor would do > anything with a logged event that has no triggers ... > Because I don't know details about trigger stuff, I may be misunderstanding. As far as I see, KEY_CHANGED stuff requires to log every event about logged tuples. However I'm suspicious if KEY_CHANGED check is necessary. Removing KEY_CHANGED stuff seems to solve the TODO FOREIGN KEY INSERT & UPDATE/DELETE in transaction "change violation" though it may introduce other bugs. Regards, Hiroshi Inoue