Could you not use one trigger for both MV1 and MV2?
Yes I could.
But my use case is to build over 10 "materialized" views that have
complex dependencies.
And it would not be a feasible solution to handcode all those
dependencies into one huge trigger.
"
Triggers: support user defined execution order. Oracle:
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER TRI_TEST_2 BEFORE INSERT
ON TEST FOR EACH ROW FOLLOWS TRI_TEST_1.
MS SQL Server: sp_settriggerorder.
SQL specifies that multiple triggers should be fired in
time-of-creation order.
PostgreSQL uses name order, which was judged to be more convenient.
Derby: triggers are fired in the order in which they were created.
"
Actually I like the PostgreSQL behavior. So far I don't know about
other databases.
I would side on sql and derby.
But name based order is fine.
Then you just name the triggers so that they collate into a proper order
by using for example an index number.
- rami
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "H2
Database" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/h2-database?hl=en.
