2007-11-22 = 14:54 >>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 09:14:14AM +0100, Bart Degryse wrote: > I would do something like this (not tested, but conceptually working): Hello, > BEGIN > if old.story is not null and new.story !=3D old.story then > new.story =3D sanitize_text(new.story); > end if; > --checks on other field can be included here, eg > if old.otherfield is not null and new.otherfield !=3D old.otherfield = then > new.otherfield =3D sanitize_text(new.otherfield); > end if; But if I test a non-existent column for not being null I will have an=20 exception, no? Otherwise this is a nice way of doing it. Thanks, ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq --=__PartD6F0D932.0__= Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Description: HTML

I don't really see how you could test a non-existing column. = Here

> if old.story is not null and new.story !=3D old.story then
>= ; new.story =3D sanitize_text(new.story);
you would always = use fields from OLD and NEW otherwise you can't even create the = trigger.

If a table has 3 fields (field1, field2 and field3) then why would = you create a trigger in which

you do something with field4. I haven't tried (because it seems so = absurd) but I expect

PG to refuse to create such a trigger.

>>> Louis-David Mitterrand <vindex+lists-pgsql-sql@apa= rtia.org> 2007-11-22 14:54 >>>
On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at = 09:14:14AM +0100, Bart Degryse wrote:
> I would do something like = this (not tested, but conceptually working):

Hello,

> = BEGIN
> if old.story is not null and new.story !=3D old.story = then
>   new.story =3D sanitize_text(new.story);
> = end if;
> --checks on other field can be included here, eg
> = if old.otherfield is not null and new.otherfield !=3D old.otherfield = then
>   new.otherfield =3D sanitize_text(new.otherfield);<= BR>> end if;

But if I test a non-existent column for not being = null I will have an
exception, no?

Otherwise this is a nice way = of doing it.

Thanks,

---------------------------(end of = broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our = extensive FAQ?

         = ;      http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

--=__PartD6F0D932.0__=--