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

Re: Partitioning feature ...

From: Emmanuel Cecchet <manu(at)frogthinker(dot)org>
To: Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>
Cc: 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: 2009-03-30 15:42:53
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
I agree with Jaime that system triggers should execute independently of 
user triggers.
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?

Emmanuel Cecchet
FTO @ Frog Thinker 
Open Source Development & Consulting
email: manu(at)frogthinker(dot)org
Skype: emmanuel_cecchet

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Guillaume LelargeDate: 2009-03-30 15:46:27
Subject: Re: gettext, plural form and translation
Previous:From: Andrew ChernowDate: 2009-03-30 15:24:01
Subject: Re: PQinitSSL broken in some use casesf

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