| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, ian(at)thepathcentral(dot)com, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Trigger behaviour not as stated |
| Date: | 2018-01-28 19:18:38 |
| Message-ID: | 28238.1517167118@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 11:07 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>> ... The attached patch updates the docs to say
>> statement-level triggers fire on the "referenced" table, while row-level
>> triggers fire only on the "affected" table, (vs. all affected tables)
>> even if they are not referenced in the query. I would backpatch this to
>> PG 10.
> I was trying to convey that, but it does seem a little terse and
> cryptic. Your addition of "referenced" and "only" make it clearer.
Hm, the first part of Bruce's change seems fine, but I think this wording:
... In contrast,
! row-level triggers are fired only on affected partitions or child tables,
! even if they are not referenced in the query.
is still confusing. How about something like
In contrast, row-level triggers are fired for each actual row change,
including changes in partitions or child tables that are not directly
named in the query.
Possibly "row operation" would be better than "row change".
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2018-01-28 20:34:02 | Re: Trigger behaviour not as stated |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2018-01-28 10:19:47 | Re: Trigger behaviour not as stated |