Kevin Grittner <kgri...@gmail.com> writes: > Well, I was sort of hoping that the triggers that can now be defined > but can never fire *did* fire at some point.
They will fire if you have an INSTEAD OF row-level trigger; the existence of that trigger is what determines whether we implement DML on a view through the view's own triggers or through translation to an action on the underlying table. I do not think it'd be reasonable to throw an error for creation of a statement-level view trigger when there's no row-level trigger, because that just imposes a hard-to-deal-with DDL ordering dependency. You could make a case for having the updatable-view translation code print a WARNING if it notices that there are statement-level triggers that cannot be fired due to the translation. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers