Re: Why are triggers semi-deferred? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Philip Warner
Subject Re: Why are triggers semi-deferred?
Date
Msg-id 5.1.0.14.0.20030506013401.047fc048@mail.rhyme.com.au
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Why are triggers semi-deferred?  (Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>)
Responses Re: Why are triggers semi-deferred?
List pgsql-hackers
At 08:20 AM 5/05/2003 -0700, Stephan Szabo wrote:
>it might be better to make times that the
>triggers can run be choosable (with the spec behavior becoming default
>eventually) because we've got backward compatibility issues and we've kind
>overloaded the trigger system to do the foreign keys which have their own
>timing issues.

I think you are right here too; we need some way to make the triggers 
function according to the spec, as well as to preserve compatibility for 
constraint settings -- at least constrint triggers should fire when the 
constraints expect it, and normal triggers should fire when the spec says 
they should fire.



----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner                    |     __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd.   |----/       -  \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498)          |          /(@)   ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81         |                 _________  \
Fax: (+61) 03 5330 3172          |                 ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au          |                /           \|                                 |    --________--
PGP key available upon request,  |  /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371   |/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Philip Warner
Date:
Subject: Re: Why are triggers semi-deferred?
Next
From: Philip Warner
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump future problem.