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: I am executing al
"Rolf A. de By" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, this is an inheritance set-up. But actually no: I am executing all
> my data changes against the parent table, and want the trigger on that
> parent table to fire for an insert on the parent table as it does. But
> I also want the trigger to f
Thanks Tom,
Yes, this is an inheritance set-up. But actually no: I am executing all
my data changes against the parent table, and want the trigger on that
parent table to fire for an insert on the parent table as it does. But
I also want the trigger to fire when an update on the parent table
"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-op, with warnings. The actual code of my original
> trigger function is irrelevan
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 Dec 12, 2007, at 3:38 PM, Rolf A. de By wrote:
Greetings list,
Running pg 8.2.3. on a windows machine, I have become blind in a
trigger definition puzzle, so hope that somebody may help me
understand where I goof.
I have a base table i_s that has three tables that inherit from it,
Greetings list,
Running pg 8.2.3. on a windows machine, I have become blind in a
trigger definition puzzle, so hope that somebody may help me understand
where I goof.
I have a base table i_s that has three tables that inherit from it, one
of them being i_s_nowhere. The base table should be
