| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Oliver Elphick <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | "Duncan Adams (DNS)" <duncan(dot)adams(at)vcontractor(dot)co(dot)za>, pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: function problems. |
| Date: | 2002-10-25 14:11:40 |
| Message-ID: | 22691.1035555100@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-novice |
Oliver Elphick <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> A BEFORE trigger must return the NEW row after possible alterations --
> returning NULL will abort the update or insert, so this must be changed
> to be an AFTER trigger.
Or leave it as a BEFORE trigger and do "RETURN NEW" at the end.
I'd recommend BEFORE triggers over AFTER triggers anytime you have the
choice, because AFTER triggers go into a list of things-to-do-later;
if that list gets large (ie, you do many updates in one command) you
will have performance problems.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rick Szeto | 2002-10-25 15:19:29 | Latin1 characters in sql scripts |
| Previous Message | Nicolas ... | 2002-10-25 13:32:13 | Views |