Re: Remembering bug #6123 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Remembering bug #6123
Date
Msg-id 19171.1326490897@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Remembering bug #6123  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Responses Re: Remembering bug #6123  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> writes:
> I'm also fine with generating an error for such dirty tricks, and I
> agree that if that's indeed possible we should make the message
> general enough to cover that case.  Nothing comes to mind at the
> moment, but I'll think on it.

What do you think of

ERROR: tuple to be updated was already modified by an operation triggered by the UPDATE command
HINT: Consider using an AFTER trigger instead of a BEFORE trigger to propagate changes to other rows.

(s/update/delete/ for the DELETE case of course)

The phrase "triggered by" seems slippery enough to cover cases such as a
volatile function executed by the UPDATE.  The HINT doesn't cover that
case of course, but we have a ground rule that HINTs can be wrong.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Remembering bug #6123
Next
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: Remembering bug #6123