"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "Affan Salman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
