> > Any execution order for regular triggers would be as good as any other
> This is perhaps true for "cleanly designed" applications, but people
> have requested that we nail down the execution order, and we have
> responded by specifying that it's alphabetical within an event.
I understand and a
Frank van Vugt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Order in which they were defined"? Hmm, I thought we had agreed long
>> since to trigger these things in alphabetical order. Something is wrong
>> here.
> Allow me to repeat and possibly clarify an earlier (personal) point of
> interest:
> Any exe
Frank van Vugt wrote:
If during a transaction a number of deferred triggers are fired, what
will be their execution order upon the commit?
Should be alphabetical within each triggering event, IIRC.
Mmm, yes, but are all the deferred triggers on the same event 'grouped'?
What I'm thinking about is
> > If during a transaction a number of deferred triggers are fired, what
> > will be their execution order upon the commit?
> Should be alphabetical within each triggering event, IIRC.
Mmm, yes, but are all the deferred triggers on the same event 'grouped'?
What I'm thinking about is something
Frank van Vugt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If during a transaction a number of deferred triggers are fired, what will be
> their execution order upon the commit?
Should be alphabetical within each triggering event, IIRC.
> Also, are the fire-events of deferred triggers kept in a system catalogu
