I agree with Jaime that system triggers should execute independently of
In the particular case of partitioning, the system trigger should
execute after the user triggers. However, as the partitioning trigger is
a row level trigger, it is not clear what is going to happen with user
triggers that work at the statement level.
Jaime Casanova wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 6:51 AM, Kedar Potdar <kedar(dot)potdar(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> As triggers are executed in order of their names, we've prefixed the
>>> trigger names with "zz". This should work fine as long as no-one uses
>>> trigger-name which starts with "zz".
> this seems a lot fragile... why system generated triggers has to be
> executed following the same rules (talking about order of execution)
> as user triggers? can't we simply execute them first or last or maybe
> be clever and mark one to be executed first and others last?
FTO @ Frog Thinker
Open Source Development & Consulting
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Guillaume Lelarge||Date: 2009-03-30 15:46:27|
|Subject: Re: gettext, plural form and translation|
|Previous:||From: Andrew Chernow||Date: 2009-03-30 15:24:01|
|Subject: Re: PQinitSSL broken in some use casesf|