Re: Partitioning feature ...

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Emmanuel Cecchet <manu(at)asterdata(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Nikhil Sontakke <nikhil(dot)sontakke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, Kedar Potdar <kedar(dot)potdar(at)gmail(dot)com>, Emmanuel Cecchet <Emmanuel(dot)Cecchet(at)asterdata(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Amit Gupta <amit(dot)pc(dot)gupta(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Partitioning feature ...
Date: 2009-03-31 17:16:49
Message-ID: 49D25001.5080003@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 3/31/09 9:45 AM, Emmanuel Cecchet wrote:
> Yes, there is a good reason. As a trigger can update the tuple value,
> this can change the routing decision. If you have a user trigger that
> tries to change the key value after the partition choice has been made,
> this will lead to an integrity constraint violation which is probably
> not what the user expects.

Actually, it's worse. Depending on the timing of the triggers, it's
possible to bypass the FK check entirely, and you can end up with
inconsistent data.

--Josh

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message justin 2009-03-31 17:44:19 Re: string_to_array with empty input
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2009-03-31 17:14:20 Re: can't load plpython