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/)
