On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 14:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Right offhand the only way that I could see for the tuple to disappear
> before the trigger fires is if a concurrent VACUUM removed it, which
> should not happen for a tuple inserted by a still-active transaction.
> If you've got autovacuum runni
Markus Schiltknecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sorry, I was unclear: luckily the error is easily reproducible. The
> problem is just to cut unnecessary parts and to come up with a small
> test case. I'll give it a try tomorrow.
> As far as VACUUM is concerned: I run this data-loading script jus
Markus Schiltknecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> in the mean time I've traced the problem down to a 'CONSTRAINT' declared
> as 'DEFERRABLE INITIALLY DEFERED'. As soon as I remove that constraint
> the transaction commits nicely. BTW: I'm running in ISOLATION LEVEL
> SERIALIZABLE, if that matter
Hello Tom,
in the mean time I've traced the problem down to a 'CONSTRAINT' declared
as 'DEFERRABLE INITIALLY DEFERED'. As soon as I remove that constraint
the transaction commits nicely. BTW: I'm running in ISOLATION LEVEL
SERIALIZABLE, if that matters.
Has something changed so that it's wor
Markus Schiltknecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm getting the following error from my python script, which tries to
> insert lots of data in one transaction:
> libpq.OperationalError: ERROR: failed to fetch new tuple for AFTER trigger
That's not supposed to happen. Can you provide a test ca
Hi,
I'm getting the following error from my python script, which tries to
insert lots of data in one transaction:
libpq.OperationalError: ERROR: failed to fetch new tuple for AFTER trigger
I have several AFTER triggers in place, which one raises this error? I'm
sure I only INSERT data, no U
