Re: [GENERAL] After Trigger
Bob Pawley wrote: I am seeking wording for a procedure that will initiate a trigger only after another trigger has completed its function. In this case I want to drop a table that is created and used by the first trigger. You could just call a function from your trigger, or handle it inside the trigger. An alternative approach would be to use a permanent table, fill it within your transaction and trunk it eventually. To other transactions there'll never be any data in it, and you lose the overhead of creating and dropping the table (replacing it by trunking...). -- Alban Hertroys [EMAIL PROTECTED] magproductions b.v. T: ++31(0)534346874 F: ++31(0)534346876 M: I: www.magproductions.nl A: Postbus 416 7500 AK Enschede // Integrate Your World // ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [GENERAL] After Trigger
On 22/9/2006 2:14, "Bob Pawley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am seeking wording for a procedure that will initiate a trigger only after > another trigger has completed its function. In this case I want to drop a > table that is created and used by the first trigger. Sounds like you should use a temporary table. CREATE TEMP TABLE mytmptable (.. This table will just disappear shortly after your trigger is finished. -- Shane Ambler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Get Sheeky @ http://Sheeky.Biz ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [GENERAL] After Trigger
On Thursday 21 September 2006 12:44 pm, Bob Pawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> thus communicated: --> I am seeking wording for a procedure that will initiate a trigger only after another trigger has completed its function. In this case I want to drop a table that is created and used by the first trigger. --> --> Could someone point me to documentation? --> --> Bob Pawley According to the 7.4.6 docs: "If more than one trigger is defined for the same event on the same relation, the triggers will be fired in alphabetical order by trigger name. In the case of before triggers, the possibly-modified row returned by each trigger becomes the input to the next trigger. If any before trigger returns a NULL pointer, the operation is abandoned and subsequent triggers are not fired. " So, name the last trigger you want to fire such that it falls aphabetically behind the rest. -- Terry Tucker Turbo's IT Manager Turbo, division of Ozburn-Hessey Logistics 2251 Jesse Jewell Pkwy NE Gainesville, GA 30501 Tel: (336) 372-6812 Fax: (336) 372-6812 Cell: (336) 363-4719 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.turbocorp.com ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
[GENERAL] After Trigger
I am seeking wording for a procedure that will initiate a trigger only after another trigger has completed its function. In this case I want to drop a table that is created and used by the first trigger. Could someone point me to documentation? Bob Pawley
Re: [GENERAL] after trigger question
From: "Feite Brekeveld" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Stephan Szabo wrote: > > > On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Feite Brekeveld wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I have put an AFTER INSERT TRIGGER on a table. > > > > > > If the triggerfunction fails to do an operation shouldn't the insert > > > already have taken place ? > > > > It depends on what you mean by fails to do an operation. If it > > raises an actual error the transaction is going to be rolled back so the > > insert is effectively undone. > > The conversion of a timestring to an integer value fails because it is > sometimes illegal formatted , but I would like to have the the original > data inserted in the table as a string. Use a BEFORE INSERT trigger then to check/translate the timestring before you insert. - Richard Huxton ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
