On Sat, 13 Dec 2003, cnliou wrote:
> Thank you very much for your explanation!
>
> ¡° Include¡m"Stephan Szabo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>¡n
> wrote:
> >There have been discussions in the past about when cascade
> events
> >should occur. The code currently does what I believe was
> last
> >agreed upon, a
Thank you very much for your explanation!
¡° Include¡m"Stephan Szabo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>¡n
wrote:
>There have been discussions in the past about when cascade
events
>should occur. The code currently does what I believe was
last
>agreed upon, although its behavior is fairly wierd for
deferred
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, cnliou wrote:
> It looks to me a referential integrity problem (only?)
> within PLPGSQL. Plesase see the test result below.
There have been discussions in the past about when cascade events
should occur. The code currently does what I believe was last
agreed upon, although
