| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, eugene(dot)pliskin(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #17689: Two UPDATE operators in common table expressions (CTE) perform not as expected |
| Date: | 2022-11-18 18:53:14 |
| Message-ID: | 2251431.1668797594@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> On 2022-Nov-18, Marko Tiikkaja wrote:
>> This is a documented limitation:
>>> Trying to update the same row twice in a single statement is not
>>> supported.
> I wonder if we should try to detect the case, and raise an error instead
> of it resulting in undefined behavior.
My recollection is that that is really fallout from an ancient and
intentional executor behavior, that we have to ignore multiple updates
in order to not get into infinite loops. See comment about the
"Halloween problem" in nodeLockRows.c. (I'm pretty sure there were once
more comments about that, somewhere closer to ExecUpdate/ExecDelete ---
this all dates back to Berkeley.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2022-11-18 19:21:05 | BUG #17690: Nonresponsive client on replica can halt replication indefinitely |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2022-11-18 17:05:57 | Re: BUG #17689: Two UPDATE operators in common table expressions (CTE) perform not as expected |