Re: Triggered Data Change check
От | Hiroshi Inoue |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Triggered Data Change check |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3BEF3CC9.836C5FC5@tpf.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Triggered Data Change check (Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Triggered Data Change check
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > > Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com> writes: > > Well, I wonder if the check is so weak as to be fairly useless in the > > first place really, even if applied to the statement as opposed to the > > transaction. > > Looking back at our discussion around 24-Oct, I recall that I was > leaning to the idea that the correct interpretation of the spec's > "triggered data change" rule is that it prohibits scenarios that are > impossible anyway under MVCC, because of the MVCC tuple visibility > rules. Strictly speaking MVCC is only for read-only queries. Even under MVCC, update, delete and select .. for update have to see the newest tuples. Constraints shouldn't ignore the update/delete operations in the future from MVCC POV. regards, Hiroshi Inoue
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: