"Hiroshi Inoue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ISTM commands/trigger.c is broken. > The behabior seems to be changed by recent changes made by Tom. Hm. I changed the code to not log an AFTER event unless there is actually a trigger of the relevant type, thus suppressing what I considered a very serious memory leak in the non-deferred-trigger case. Are there cases where we must log an event anyway, and if so what are they? It didn't look to me like the deferred event executor would do anything with a logged event that has no triggers ... regards, tom lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KEY Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KEY Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KEY Jan Wieck
- Re: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KEY Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KEY Stephan Szabo
- Re: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KEY Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KEY Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KEY Jan Wieck
- Re: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KEY Bruce Momjian
- RE: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KE... Hiroshi Inoue
- RE: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KE... Tom Lane
- RE: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KE... Hiroshi Inoue
- Re: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KE... Tom Lane
- RE: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KE... Hiroshi Inoue
- Re: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KE... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KEY Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Bug in FOREIGN KEY Max Khon