Message-ID: <740c8d600cac5b816f8351dbc47b7e457260ed48.camel@cybertec.at>
Subject: Re: Clarify how triggers relate to transactions
From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: him@nathanmlong.com, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 13:06:05 +0200
In-Reply-To: <1120625.1627676423@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <161953360822.695.15805897835151971142@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
	 <1a565681fe54535d69e6418ef5ab55405b92beac.camel@cybertec.at>
	 <62219f2ce78faf09687d998f347c518b3c08d067.camel@cybertec.at>
	 <1120625.1627676423@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.5 (3.36.5-2.fc32) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/740c8d600cac5b816f8351dbc47b7e457260ed48.camel%40cybertec.at>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 2021-07-30 at 16:20 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes:
> > On Wed, 2021-04-28 at 13:24 +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2021-04-27 at 14:26 +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> > > > If I understand correctly, it would be helpful to add this sentence or a
> > > > corrected version of it: "Triggers always execute in the same transaction as
> > > > the triggering event, and if a trigger fails, the transaction is rolled
> > > > back."
> >
> > Here is a proposed patch for this.
> 
> I think this is a good idea, but I felt like you'd added the extra
> sentences in not-terribly-well-chosen places.  For instance, your
> first addition in trigger.sgml is adding to a para that talks about
> triggers for tables, while the next para talks about triggers for
> views.  So it seems unclear whether the statement is meant to apply
> to view triggers too.
> 
> I think it'd work out best to make this a separate para after the
> one that defines before/after/instead-of triggers.  How do you
> like the attached?

That is better, and I like your patch.  Thanks!
Keeping paragraphs short is a good thing.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe