Re: Order of evaluation in triggers for checks on inherited table partitions

On 2011-05-27, Kevin Crain <kevin(dot)crain1(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I am trying to create a trigger on updates to a table that is
> partitioned. The child tables are partitioned by month and include
> checks on a timestamp field.

> However when I try to update an existing record with a
> timestamp that would place it in a child table different from the
> child table it is in I get an error due to the check on the child
> table it is currently in. My best guess as to what is happening is
> that the trigger is evaluating the check before it evaluates the
> trigger function and thus cannot tell that the update to the original
> table should never take place. I have included an example below. The
> error that results is "new row for relation "t_foo_2011_6" violates
> check constraint "t_foo_2011_6_f_timestamp_check""

the problem is the check is running before the trigger.
perhaps you can use a rule instead of a trigger?

--
⚂⚃ 100% natural