Foreign keys do not cascade deletions. If table y references table x on
column a, the attempt to delete records in x with dependent records in y
will yield an error. So the answer to that question is no, your trigger
won't get called because a) y doesn't get touched because that's not
what foreign keys do and b) an error is raised anyway
Regarding the usefulness of triggers...I tend to stay away from them. I
like to keep my data in my database and my logic in my application. I
try to relegate triggers to very simple things like timestamping
records. i.e. things that I won't later wonder "What in the hell is
going on???"
surabhi.ahuja wrote:
is there an advantage of using a trigger? when the same job can be
performed by a stored procedure?
one more question is as follows:
suppose i have a table x, with a primary attribute 'a'
and i have a table y, with the primary attribute 'b', and a foreign
key 'a'.
suppose i say delete from x where a = '1',
it means that not only the rows from x get deleted but also rows from
y get deleted.
now i have a trigger which is written for deletes taking place from
the table y.
however if i say delete from x where a = '1',
will the trigger (mentioned above) still be called? (because delete
are also taking place from the table y)
thanks,
regards
Surabhi
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
