Re: apparent RI bug
| От | Stephan Szabo |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: apparent RI bug |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20080403132648.O21440@megazone.bigpanda.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: apparent RI bug (chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: apparent RI bug
|
| Список | pgsql-sql |
On Thu, 3 Apr 2008, chester c young wrote: > --- Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.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.
В списке pgsql-sql по дате отправления: