From: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
---|---|
To: | "'Peter Eisentraut'" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Sergey Mavrinsky <mavr(at)solvo(dot)ru> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, "'pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: POSTGRES BUG - FIX IT PLEASE |
Date: | 2000-10-10 20:07:13 |
Message-ID: | 8F4C99C66D04D4118F580090272A7A23018D45@SECTORBASE1 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
> > create table t1
> > (
> > f1 integer,
> > f2 integer
> > );
> >
> > create table t2
> > (
> > f1 integer references t1(f1),
> > f2 integer
> > );
>
> > begin transaction;
> > insert into t1(f1,f2) values(1,1);
> > delete from t1 where f1=1;
>
> > ERROR: triggered data change violation on relation "t1"
>
> You cannot change data twice within a transaction if there's a RI
> constraint on the table. This is per SQL, nothing we can do about it.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Is it true?! *Any reasons* for this? DELETE doesn't break integrity rules.
Just tested it in Oracle - deletion is allowed!
But yes, I know that Oracle doesn't always follow standards -:)
Can someone test it under Informix, others?
Vadim
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2000-10-10 21:05:23 | Re: [HACKERS] RE: POSTGRES BUG - FIX IT PLEASE |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2000-10-10 19:40:00 | Re: POSTGRES BUG - FIX IT PLEASE |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2000-10-10 20:11:50 | Re: [HACKERS] My new job |
Previous Message | Jason Earl | 2000-10-10 20:03:35 | Re: [INTERFACES] Re: Announcing PgSQL - a Python DB-API 2.0 compliant interface to PostgreSQL |