From: | Peter Childs <blue(dot)dragon(at)blueyonder(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Trigger |
Date: | 2003-10-23 07:16:27 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.58.0310230811060.11940@bluedragon.homelinux.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003, scott.marlowe wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Oct 2003, Peter Childs wrote:
>
> > Is it possible to deferr a trigger until commit, Or to have the
> > trigger not occur if the transaction is rolled back? Like transaction.
> > I think its possible since constraints use triggers and if so why
> > is this a standard feature.
> > Also is there anyway of seeing what triggers exsist and what they
> > do? (psql \<somthing> or the like)
>
> A trigger inside a transaction should automagically roll back should the
> transaction fail, shouldn't it?
>
>
Only if it only affects that database. If the trigger uses C to
tell an outside app whats going on, it will not get the truth.
Background, we are trying to get the database to tell clients when
records get updated, deleted or inserted so that they can update there
on-screen displays without having to query the database every couple of
seconds which would put an unnessary strain on the database. Hence
producing quicker respose times.
Peter Childs
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alex | 2003-10-23 08:07:21 | Timestamps in Views |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2003-10-23 05:53:22 | Re: Recomended FS |