Lodewijk Vöge escribió: > On 19-aug-2007, at 12:38, Tom Lane wrote: > >> An additional problem with your proposal is that it fails to consider >> other changes that might be happening concurrently -- eg, what if some >> other backend deletes a source row after you copy it, and commits before >> you do? > > then the patch indeed failed, but when I change it to check those carried > over FKs also once, it catches it correctly. > > are there other such issues? or is this kind of optimization not going in > no matter what?
It might go in if it's correct. If you have an answer to all the objections then there's no reason not to include it. But I must admit I didn't understand what was your answer to the above objection; care to rephrase? -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/CTMLCN8V17R4 "On the other flipper, one wrong move and we're Fatal Exceptions" (T.U.X.: Term Unit X - http://www.thelinuxreview.com/TUX/) ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
