On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> What's going on here is that we're checking the SELECT that is added
> by the rule, and per TFM that executes before the UPDATE, so you get
> this error first rather than one complaining about UPDATE (which you
> would get later if this one hadn't
Robert Haas writes:
> There are a lot of things that are understandably forbidden in a
> read-only transaction, but one would not expect SELECT to be among
> them. And yet, one can get the system to complain about precisely
> that:
> ... This seems to be the result of this code in ExecCheckXactRe
There are a lot of things that are understandably forbidden in a
read-only transaction, but one would not expect SELECT to be among
them. And yet, one can get the system to complain about precisely
that:
rhaas=# create table rules_src(f1 int, f2 int);
ERROR: relation "rules_src" already exists
r
