-Original Message-
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> > 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 othe
"Hiroshi Inoue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 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.
I just realized that myself. The code was still doing it the hard
way (eg, logging
I wrote:
> 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 ...
Oops, I missed the uses of deferredTriggerGetPreviousEvent(). Fixed
now.
> -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
"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 s
> -Original Message-
> From: Bruce Momjian
>
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Here is another bug:
> > >
ISTM commands/trigger.c is broken.
The behabior seems to be changed by recent changes made by Tom.
* Check if we're interested in this row at all
* --
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Here is another bug:
> >
> > test=> begin;
> > BEGIN
> > test=> INSERT INTO primarytest2 VALUES (5,5);
> > INSERT 18757 1
> > test=> UPDATE primarytest2 SET col2=1 WHERE col1 = 5 AND col2 = 5;
> > ERROR: deferredTriggerGetPreviousEvent: event for tuple (0,10) not
> > fo
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Here is another bug:
>
> test=> begin;
> BEGIN
> test=> INSERT INTO primarytest2 VALUES (5,5);
> INSERT 18757 1
> test=> UPDATE primarytest2 SET col2=1 WHERE col1 = 5 AND col2 = 5;
> ERROR: deferredTriggerGetPreviousEvent: event for tuple (0,10) not
> found
Schema?
J
Here is another bug:
test=> begin;
BEGIN
test=> INSERT INTO primarytest2 VALUES (5,5);
INSERT 18757 1
test=> UPDATE primarytest2 SET col2=1 WHERE col1 = 5 AND col2 = 5;
ERROR: deferredTriggerGetPreviousEvent: event for tuple (0,10) not
found
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Bruce Momjian writes:
>
We have to decide how to address this, perhaps with a clearer error
message and a TODO item.
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Bruce Momjian writes:
> > >
> > > > ERROR: triggered data change violation on relation "primarytest2"
> > >
> > > We're getting this report about once every 48 hours, which
> > Think I misinterpreted the SQL3 specs WR to this detail. The
> > checks must be made per statement, not at the transaction
> > level. I'll try to fix it, but we need to define what will
> > happen with referential actions in the case of conflicting
> > actions o
hi, there!
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > This problem with foreign keys has been reported to me, and I have confirmed
> > the bug exists in current sources. The DELETE should succeed:
> >
> > ---
> >
>
This is Jan's reply to the issue.
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Bruce Momjian writes:
> > >
> > > > ERROR: triggered data change violation on relation "primarytest2"
> > >
> > > We're getting this report about once every 48 hours, which would make it a
> > > FAQ. (hint, hint)
> > >
> >
> >
> >
Can someone tell me where we are on this?
> This problem with foreign keys has been reported to me, and I have confirmed
> the bug exists in current sources. The DELETE should succeed:
>
> ---
>
> CREATE TABLE primarytest
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> >
> > > ERROR: triggered data change violation on relation "primarytest2"
> >
> > We're getting this report about once every 48 hours, which would make it a
> > FAQ. (hint, hint)
> >
>
>
> First time I heard of it. Does anyone know more details?
> Bruce Momjian writes:
>
> > ERROR: triggered data change violation on relation "primarytest2"
>
> We're getting this report about once every 48 hours, which would make it a
> FAQ. (hint, hint)
>
First time I heard of it. Does anyone know more details?
--
Bruce Momjian
Bruce Momjian writes:
> ERROR: triggered data change violation on relation "primarytest2"
We're getting this report about once every 48 hours, which would make it a
FAQ. (hint, hint)
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://yi.org/peter-e/
17 matches
Mail list logo
