From: chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>
To: Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com>
Cc: sql pgsql <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: apparent RI bug
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 13:16:42 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <811324.18014.qm@web54305.mail.re2.yahoo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080403113003.Q17782@megazone.bigpanda.com>
--- 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 so, is this
by design?
____________________________________________________________________________________
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost.
http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: chestercyoung@yahoo.com, sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com
Subject: Re: apparent RI bug
In-Reply-To: <811324.18014.qm@web54305.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox