On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Tom Lane wrote: > Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Tom Lane wrote: > >> rule/foreign key interaction reported by Michele Bendazzoli > > > In the interests of disclosure, if the case in question for the rule > > fails, almost certainly deferred fk constraints will as well which I > > think makes this a must fix for 7.4 and is another push to getting a > > 7.3.5. > > Hm, does Jan's just-committed fix address the concern you had?
Head now passes the case I'd thought of: create table ta1(a int primary key); create table ta2(a int references ta1 initially deferred); begin; insert into ta2 values (3); update ta2 set a=3 where a=3; -- should error, but might not if the update isn't checked end; I'm thinking that this is another test that probably belongs in the foreign key regression. Does anyone object to me sending a patch to add this and a couple of related cases? ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
