Ouch, that hurts! It suddenly dawns on me . . . Big difference on table
that you specify and table where it
actually takes effect. Confusing at first. Thanks a million, Tom.
"Rolf A. de By" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Yes, this is an inheritance set-up. But actually no
table is
executed, and this does not happen.
Rolf
Tom Lane wrote:
"Rolf A. de By" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Thanks for that. There is some misunderstanding here. For this example,
I had taken the sting out of my trigger function and turned it into a
much more concise no-o
Erik,
Thanks for that. There is some misunderstanding here. For this example,
I had taken the sting out of my trigger function and turned it into a
much more concise no-op, with warnings. The actual code of my original
trigger function is irrelevant. The no-op trigger function displays the
on time.
Where did I deserve this?? ;-)
In attempts to solve this I did mess around with trigger and trigger
function definitions a bit. Could there be funny traces of this? What
is the best way to analyse this behavior? I am testing from a pgAdmin
1.8 setup.
All suggestions
