Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt

On 2011-11-04 01:12, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> I would like some opinions on the ideas on this patch, and on the patch
> itself.  If someone wants more discussion on implementation details of
> each part of the patch, I'm happy to provide a textual description --
> please just ask.

Jumping in a bit late here, but thanks for working on this: it looks 
like it could solve some annoying problems for us.

I do find myself idly wondering if those problems couldn't be made to go 
away more simply given some kind of “I will never ever update this key” 
constraint.  I'm having trouble picturing the possible lock interactions 
as it is.  :-)


Jeroen