| From: | Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: RI checks during UPDATEs |
| Date: | 2007-02-02 05:10:05 |
| Message-ID: | 3C6D247A-27FD-406C-BA52-C933C4F5137F@decibel.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Jan 30, 2007, at 1:17 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> It would be even better if there was some way of not executing the
> trigger at all if we knew that the UPDATE statement doesn't SET the FK
> columns.
Other databases allow you to put a WHERE or CHECK clause on triggers,
so that they will only fire if that evaluates to true. That would
allow FK triggers to be defined as
CREATE TRIGGER ... WHERE NEW.fk != OLD.fk
and would obviously have other uses as well. Of course the question
is how much time that would save vs just doing the same check in the
trigger function itself.
--
Jim Nasby jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Fetter | 2007-02-02 05:11:42 | Re: writing new regexp functions |
| Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2007-02-02 05:02:50 | Re: [HACKERS] Talks for OSCON? Only 5 days left! |