| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nikhil Sontakke <nikhil(dot)sontakke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, Kedar Potdar <kedar(dot)potdar(at)gmail(dot)com>, Emmanuel Cecchet <manu(at)asterdata(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Amit Gupta <amit(dot)pc(dot)gupta(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Partitioning feature ... |
| Date: | 2009-03-31 14:46:59 |
| Message-ID: | 20090331144659.GS23023@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Nikhil Sontakke escribió:
> > >> 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?
>
> AFAICS, we do not have any category like system triggers. So yeah, it would
> have been nice to generate triggers with names (starting with __ for
> example) for such special triggers. But I don't think we disallow
> user-triggers starting with underscores etc.
We already have system triggers -- the FK triggers. I don't think we've
had all that much trouble with them.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2009-03-31 14:57:35 | Re: [GENERAL] pgstattuple triggered checkpoint failure and database outage? |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2009-03-31 14:44:49 | Re: string_to_array with empty input |