Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.184]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C2152E0081 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2008 15:33:12 -0300 (ADT) Received: from developer.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 76898-04 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2008 15:33:04 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from megazone.bigpanda.com (megazone.bigpanda.com [64.147.171.210]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA4942E008C for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2008 15:33:06 -0300 (ADT) Received: by megazone.bigpanda.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 847253648D; Thu, 3 Apr 2008 11:33:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by megazone.bigpanda.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81EC236094; Thu, 3 Apr 2008 11:33:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 11:33:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Stephan Szabo To: chester c young Cc: sql pgsql Subject: Re: apparent RI bug In-Reply-To: <702370.31991.qm@web54301.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20080403113003.Q17782@megazone.bigpanda.com> References: <702370.31991.qm@web54301.mail.re2.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200804/25 X-Sequence-Number: 30564 On Thu, 3 Apr 2008, chester c young wrote: > > Stephan Szabo wrote: > > > On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, chester c young wrote: > > > > > it appears I have a broken RI in my db. > > > Yeah, that looks pretty broken. Can you reproduce this from a clean > > start repeatedly or is this a one off? Do you ever turn off triggers, > > perhaps by modifying the pg_class row's reltriggers (I'd guess the > > answer is no, but it'd be good to make sure)? > > only one error. unable to duplicate so far. > > this is a development db - triggers are frequently dropped and created, > but I don't think ever concurrently with db activity. 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.