Re: Is this correct behavior for ON DELETE rule? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Rick Schumeyer
Subject Re: Is this correct behavior for ON DELETE rule?
Date
Msg-id 000c01c51b9e$cede1210$0200a8c0@dell8200
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Is this correct behavior for ON DELETE rule?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Is this correct behavior for ON DELETE rule?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
I suspected that might be part of the answer.

Would some combination of triggers work instead?  I've played
with those too, but without success.

>
> This is an ancient gotcha: as soon as you delete the book row, there is
> no longer any such entry in the bookview view ... and "old.id" is
> effectively a reference to the bookview view, so the second delete
> finds no matching rows.
>


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Ron Mayer
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] A way to let Vacuum warn if FSM settings are low.
Next
From: "Rick Schumeyer"
Date:
Subject: Re: Is this correct behavior for ON DELETE rule?