Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?)
| От | Amit Langote |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CA+HiwqHnJtavV-4L+wEXK02meAXqk2Nx11Lq8QF5=1cf=T9bdw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | a misbehavior of partition row movement (?) ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?)
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 11:32 PM David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote: > On Friday, October 2, 2020, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> Reporter on that thread says that the last update should have failed >> and I don't quite see a workable alternative to that. > > > To be clear the OP would rather have it just work, the same as the non-row-movement version. Maybe insert the new rowfirst, execute the on update trigger chained from the old row, then delete the old row? I was thinking yesterday about making it just work, but considering the changes that would need to be made to how the underlying triggers fire, it does not seem we would be able to back-port the solution. -- Amit Langote EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: