From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)cerberus(dot)csd(dot)uwm(dot)edu> |
Cc: | <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Referential integrity checking issue |
Date: | 2001-11-05 16:51:42 |
Message-ID: | 20011105084607.W40711-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, 1 Nov 2001, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> I am having a problem where I want to delete all of the existing information
> in a database and reinitialize it in a transaction. I am reusing the
> primary key values and this results in an error with referential
> integrity checking.
>
> I think I have seen something similar to this discussed here previously, but
> I am not sure if it was exactly the same problem.
I believe so.
> Are things supposed to work like this?
Not really. What's happening I believe is that it's looking at the final
state of the database and seeing that a row in test2 matches. It then
also needs to determine if a matching row was re-inserted into test1
which it doesn't currently do. Part of the reason for this was a mistake
in reading a piece of the spec that made it appear that such constructs
were illegal, so they weren't coded for.
I have a test patch that I think fixes the base constraint and the no
action referential actions against a 7.2 but it should probably apply
okay against 7.1.x. (I think I sent it to the list a while back,
if not you can write me).
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | pgsql-bugs | 2001-11-06 14:18:17 | Bug #510: conditional rules sometimes work more than once |
Previous Message | Christof Petig | 2001-11-05 15:24:54 | Re: recent ECPG 7.1->7.2 incompatibility ( interval('0sec') = syntax |