I wrote:
> Justin Pryzby writes:
>> Is there any reason why WITH ORDINALITY can't work ?
>> This is passing the smoke test.
> How hard did you try to break it? It still seems to me that
> this can be fooled by an unrelated trigger with the same tgname.
Hmm ... no, it does work, because we'll
Justin Pryzby writes:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 05:02:00PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ISTM the real problem is the assumption that only related triggers could
>> share a tgname, which evidently isn't true. I think this query needs to
>> actually match on tgparentid, rather than taking shortcuts.
On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 05:02:00PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Justin Pryzby writes:
> > On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 09:43:56AM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> >> I want to mention that the 2nd problem I mentioned here is still broken.
> >>
Justin Pryzby writes:
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 09:43:56AM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>> I want to mention that the 2nd problem I mentioned here is still broken.
>> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20210717010259.gu20...@telsasoft.com
>> It happens if non-inheritted triggers on child and
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 09:43:56AM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> I want to mention that the 2nd problem I mentioned here is still broken.
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20210717010259.gu20...@telsasoft.com
>
> It happens if non-inheritted triggers on child and parent have the same name.
I want to mention that the 2nd problem I mentioned here is still broken.
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20210717010259.gu20...@telsasoft.com
It happens if non-inheritted triggers on child and parent have the same name.
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 08:02:59PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On
