> I don't think it is entirely coincidental that 1210 is the only shown > user_id with a modified_on value that is in proximity to the delete > error. > > > I don't think so either. > > My suspicion is that actions are not happening in the exact order > you think they are. > > > modified_on is CURRENT_TIMESTAMP or NOW() or somesuch. I'm not sure, > because I'm not privy to the code. > > But I'm printing the system time in bash before every statement.
That is why I wrote 'Time travel?'.
I suspect the modified_on time in the table is not accurately representing when the row is modified.
That JBDC code is pretty slow...
> > I would think that combining DELETE FROM > rel_group_user; and DELETE FROM public.access_user; in a single > transaction would be a good start to fixing this. > > > That is in fact what I'm working on now. There are 26 tables, and they > must be done in a specific order when deleting, and the reverse while > inserting. > > postgres_fdw would make this easier...
