Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Partitioning feature ...

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: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
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                      
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2009-03-31 14:57:35
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] pgstattuple triggered checkpoint failure and database outage?
Previous:From: Greg StarkDate: 2009-03-31 14:44:49
Subject: Re: string_to_array with empty input

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group