Re: apparent RI bug

On Thu, 3 Apr 2008, chester c young wrote:

> --- Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > Is it possible you ever had a before delete trigger that just did a
> > return
> > NULL rather than raising an exception? IIRC, explicitly telling the
> > system to ignore the delete will work on the referential actions.
>
> yes, it is possible, for example, a function without a body or without
> a "return old".
>
> are you saying this would override the RI constraint?

If it returned something that would have prevented the delete without an
error, yes.

> if so, is this by design?

It's basically an ongoing question (without concensus AFAIK) about whether
a rule or trigger should be allowed to stop the referential action and
what should happen if it does.