From: | Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Trigger position |
Date: | 2021-09-15 12:12:07 |
Message-ID: | CAB-JLwaQsqw7BZZ0bcTd+uckyv2v8LR2OP-kwSRrVu6_u=nwsw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
This way would be interesting for those are migrating from these databases
too. But ok, I´ll forget it.
Em qua., 15 de set. de 2021 às 08:40, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> escreveu:
> Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br> writes:
> > Alphabetical order of triggers sometimes makes me write a_Recalc or
> z_Calc
> > to be sure it´ll be the first or the last trigger with same event of that
> > table
>
> > Oracle and SQL Server have FOLLOWS and PRECEDES when defining trigger
> > execution order. Firebird has POSITION, which I like it more.
>
> Color me skeptical: doesn't that introduce more complication without
> fundamentally solving anything? You still don't know which position
> numbers other triggers have used, so it seems like this is just a
> different way to spell the same problem.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | vignesh C | 2021-09-15 12:19:19 | Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication |
Previous Message | Marcos Pegoraro | 2021-09-15 12:10:36 | Re: Trigger position |