Re: 7.4RC1 planned for Monday

On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Tom Lane wrote:

> Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> writes:
> > On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> rule/foreign key interaction reported by Michele Bendazzoli
>
> > In the interests of disclosure, if the case in question for the rule
> > fails, almost certainly deferred fk constraints will as well which I
> > think makes this a must fix for 7.4 and is another push to getting a
> > 7.3.5.
>
> Hm, does Jan's just-committed fix address the concern you had?

Head now passes the case I'd thought of:

create table ta1(a int primary key);
create table ta2(a int references ta1 initially deferred);
begin;
insert into ta2 values (3);
update ta2 set a=3 where a=3;
-- should error, but might not if the update isn't checked
end;

I'm thinking that this is another test that probably belongs in
the foreign key regression. Does anyone object to me sending a
patch to add this and a couple of related cases?