On Sat, 25 Feb 2006, Achilleus Mantzios wrote:
> O Owen Jacobson ?? Feb 24, 2006 :
>
> > Achilleus Mantzios wrote:
> >
> > > O Tom Lane ?? Feb 24, 2006 :
> > >
> > > > By definition, an AFTER trigger is too late to change what was
> > > > stored. Use a BEFORE trigger.
> > >
> > >
O Owen Jacobson έγραψε στις Feb 24, 2006 :
> Achilleus Mantzios wrote:
>
> > O Tom Lane έγραψε στις Feb 24, 2006 :
> >
> > > By definition, an AFTER trigger is too late to change what was
> > > stored. Use a BEFORE trigger.
> >
> > Too late if someone wants to store it.
> > I wanna store the in
Achilleus Mantzios wrote:
> O Tom Lane έγραψε στις Feb 24, 2006 :
>
> > By definition, an AFTER trigger is too late to change what was
> > stored. Use a BEFORE trigger.
>
> Too late if someone wants to store it.
> I wanna store the intented original values, thats why i use
> AFTER trigger.
> Bu
O Tom Lane έγραψε στις Feb 24, 2006 :
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Achilleus Mantzios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>> Is there a reason that the NEW values should remain unchanged in AFTER
> >>> row triggers?
> >>
> >> By definition, an AFTER trigger is
O Tom Lane έγραψε στις Feb 24, 2006 :
> Achilleus Mantzios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is there a reason that the NEW values should remain unchanged in AFTER
> > row triggers?
>
> By definition, an AFTER trigger is too late to change what was stored.
> Use a BEFORE trigger.
Too late if some
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Achilleus Mantzios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> Is there a reason that the NEW values should remain unchanged in AFTER
>>> row triggers?
>>
>> By definition, an AFTER trigger is too late to change what was stored.
>> Use a BEFORE
Tom Lane wrote:
> Achilleus Mantzios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is there a reason that the NEW values should remain unchanged in AFTER
> > row triggers?
>
> By definition, an AFTER trigger is too late to change what was stored.
> Use a BEFORE trigger.
But a BEFORE trigger would alter the st
Achilleus Mantzios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there a reason that the NEW values should remain unchanged in AFTER
> row triggers?
By definition, an AFTER trigger is too late to change what was stored.
Use a BEFORE trigger.
regards, tom lane
Hi,
i am currently on 7.4.12, and i what i try to do
is having an AFTER row trigger nullify one NEW column,
so as to prevent a subsequent (AFTER row) trigger from using this column's
data.
Unfortunately this nullification (assignment) does not have
any effect on the next AFTER trigger.
The fi
