Re: SQL:2011 application time

On 22.01.25 05:00, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> writes:
>> I have committed the fix for foreign key NO ACTION (patch 0002, this did
>> not require patch 0001).
>
> That commit seems to be causing occasional buildfarm failures:
>
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=indri&dt=2025-01-22%2001%3A29%3A35
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=mylodon&dt=2025-01-22%2001%3A17%3A14
>
> Both of these look like
>
> --- /Users/buildfarm/bf-data/HEAD/pgsql.build/src/test/regress/expected/without_overlaps.out 2025-01-21 20:29:36
> +++ /Users/buildfarm/bf-data/HEAD/pgsql.build/src/test/regress/results/without_overlaps.out 2025-01-21 20:43:08
> @@ -1792,8 +1792,6 @@
> SET valid_at = CASE WHEN lower(valid_at) = '2018-01-01' THEN daterange('2018-01-01', '2018-01-05')
> WHEN lower(valid_at) = '2018-02-01' THEN daterange('2018-01-05', '2018-03-01') END
> WHERE id = '[6,7)';
> -ERROR: update or delete on table "temporal_rng" violates RESTRICT setting of foreign key constraint "temporal_fk_rng2rng_fk" on table "temporal_fk_rng2rng"
> -DETAIL: Key (id, valid_at)=([6,7), [2018-01-01,2018-02-01)) is referenced from table "temporal_fk_rng2rng".
> -- a PK update that fails because both are referenced (even before commit):
> BEGIN;
> ALTER TABLE temporal_fk_rng2rng
>
> ie, an expected error did not get thrown.

I suspect the nested locking clauses in the new SQL query in the patch.
I don't see anything else in the patch that would possibly create this
kind unstable behavior.

Paul, what do you think?

I'll revert the patch soon unless we have a quick fix coming.