On 26 February 2016 at 20:42, Leonardo M. Ramé <l.r...@griensu.com> wrote:
> > > El 26/02/16 a las 16:33, s d escribió: > >> On 26 February 2016 at 20:19, Leonardo M. Ramé <l.r...@griensu.com >> <mailto:l.r...@griensu.com>> wrote: >> >> >> >> El 26/02/16 a las 16:18, s d escribió: >> >> >> On 26 February 2016 at 20:02, Leonardo M. Ramé >> <l.r...@griensu.com <mailto:l.r...@griensu.com> >> <mailto:l.r...@griensu.com <mailto:l.r...@griensu.com>>> wrote: >> >> >> El 26/02/16 a las 15:55, John R Pierce escribió: >> >> On 2/26/2016 10:29 AM, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote: >> >> Hi, I created a Postgres_FDW table (TABLE_A) and >> need to do >> an update on that table. >> >> As TABLE_A has a trigger, and the trigger does an >> insert on >> another table (TABLE_B), I had to create another >> foreign >> table called TABLE_B, that's ok. >> >> >> >> that trigger is defined on the server that actually has >> table_a, >> right? or did you define a trigger on the FDW table ? >> >> Hi John, yes, the trigger is only defined on the foreign >> server. >> >> >> Let's check we get this right! >> You have two "real" table in the remote server with a trigger >> doing it's >> job on them and on the local server you have and FDW on each >> remote >> table. Right? >> >> >> Yes, that's right. >> >> >> Then try to do the update on the remote db directly. >> >> In the meantime could you provide the table and trigger definitions? >> >> > I don't understand why the trigger is run in the caller database instead > of the called (foreign) one. > It isn't. You get this error message because the reason why the local command fails is in the remote trigger somewhere. Ezt az e-mailt egy Avast védelemmel rendelkező, vírusmentes számítógépről küldték. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> <#DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
