| From: | George Neuner <gneuner2(at)comcast(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Cascade Trigger Not Firing |
| Date: | 2019-09-16 16:24:25 |
| Message-ID: | 6odvned5d4nj3g5mnauj1r3u5rudfe1epd@4ax.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 10:00:18 -0500, Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
>On 9/14/19 9:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>[snip
>> The only mention of this feature in 38.1 "Overview of Trigger Behavior"
>> is
>>
>> UPDATE triggers*can* moreover be set to fire only if certain columns
>> are mentioned in the SET clause of the UPDATE statement.
>>
>> which seems to me to be plenty specific enough --- it is carefully
>> *not* saying that the trigger will fire if the column changes value.
>> The CREATE TRIGGER man page never says that, either.
>
>Given that the UPDATE "*can* ... be set to fire only if certain columns are
>mentioned in the SET clause of the UPDATE statement", it logically follows
>that the default behavior is something else (for example, if the field value
>changes for whatever reason.
But the default could be "any column mentioned", not necessarily any
value changed.
George
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Wilkinson | 2019-09-16 18:10:22 | deadlock on declarative partitioned table (11.3) |
| Previous Message | Natalia Ostapuk | 2019-09-16 10:57:03 | Querying nested relations |