Re: INSTEAD OF trigger on VIEWs

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: --= Tono =-- <tonodarmodjo(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: INSTEAD OF trigger on VIEWs
Date: 2005-05-23 14:06:53
Message-ID: 4291E37D.9050006@familyhealth.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

You can probably just create an INSTEAD rule on the view...

Chris

--= Tono =-- wrote:
> Is there any plans to create an INSTEAD OF trigger on
> VIEWS? I have view which consists of a master and
> detail table. When a row is inserted into the view,
> the view needs to figure out if the master record
> already exsists. If the record does not exists in the
> master table, then insert into the master and the
> detail table. If the record already exists in the
> master, just insert into detail table. Conversely, if
> a delete record is performed on the view, the view
> needs to figure out if it only needs to delete from
> the detail table, or should it also delete from the
> master table when all the detail records are already
> deleted. In Oracle this is easily done using INSTEAD
> OF triggers. INSTEAD OF triggers can only be created
> for VIEWs. The purpose of it is to "short-circuit" the
> event (INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE) and perform whatever
> is specified in the trigger.
>
> CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER schema.trigger_name INSTEAD
> OF INSERT ON object_name
> BEGIN
> -- Perform the following instead --
> END;
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-05-23 14:16:06 Re: PATCH to allow concurrent VACUUMs to not lock each
Previous Message Neil Conway 2005-05-23 13:58:58 Re: PATCH to allow concurrent VACUUMs to not lock each