From: | "Michael Paesold" <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | "Jan Wieck" <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, "Stephan Szabo" <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Tatsuo Ishii" <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Backpatch FK changes to 7.3 and 7.2? |
Date: | 2003-04-12 18:51:36 |
Message-ID: | 01b801c30124$8c915110$3201a8c0@beeblebrox |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Jan Wieck wrote:
> > In any case, why don't we get a patch against 7.3, and make an
> > announcement and let people who are interested use it and test it. With
> > in-field testing it'd probably be safe enough. :)
>
> Here it is.
>
[patch... skipping]
I applied the patch to a 7.3.2 installation, and did a make clean, make,
make check. There is one regression error. Is this an expected behaviour? Or
did I do something wrong? See regression diffs:
*** ./expected/foreign_key.out Sun Sep 22 02:37:09 2002
--- ./results/foreign_key.out Sat Apr 12 20:44:54 2003
***************
*** 882,888 ****
ERROR: $1 referential integrity violation - key in pktable still
referenced from pktable
-- fails (1,1) is being referenced (twice)
update pktable set base1=3 where base1=1;
! ERROR: $1 referential integrity violation - key referenced from pktable
not found in pktable
-- this sequence of two deletes will work, since after the first there
will be no (2,*) references
delete from pktable where base2=2;
delete from pktable where base1=2;
--- 882,888 ----
ERROR: $1 referential integrity violation - key in pktable still
referenced from pktable
-- fails (1,1) is being referenced (twice)
update pktable set base1=3 where base1=1;
! ERROR: $1 referential integrity violation - key in pktable still
referenced from pktable
-- this sequence of two deletes will work, since after the first there
will be no (2,*) references
delete from pktable where base2=2;
delete from pktable where base1=2;
Best Regards,
Michael Paesold
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Steven Singer | 2003-04-12 19:46:28 | Re: Batch replication ordering (was Re: [GENERAL] 32/64-bit |
Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2003-04-12 18:08:03 | Re: Case sensitive order by |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Neil Conway | 2003-04-12 19:29:38 | Re: Anyone working on better transaction locking? |
Previous Message | Lamar Owen | 2003-04-12 16:00:20 | Re: Upgrade to Red Hat Linux 9 broke PostgreSQL |