Message-ID: <476156EF.8080901@itc.nl>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:59:43 +0100
From: "Rolf A. de By" <deby@itc.nl>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Trigger definition . . . puzzled
References: <4760DCED.7080805@itc.nl> <12289.1197560972@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <12289.1197560972@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

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 is 
executed, and this does not happen.

Rolf

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Rolf A. de By" <deby@itc.nl> 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 irrelevant.  The no-op trigger function displays the 
>> same strange behaviour: it works as expected for INSERTs, but not for 
>> UPDATEs.  The update goes through!  And it shouldn't.
>>     
>
> Reading between the lines, I gather you have an inheritance setup and
> are expecting a trigger on the parent table to fire for events occurring
> in the child tables.  Doesn't work like that; you need to put triggers
> on the child tables.
>
> 			regards, tom lane
>   

-- 

dr ir Rolf A. de By

assoc prof Geodata Management and Engineering
dept Geoinformation Processing
ITC -- International Institute for Geo-information Science & Earth Observation
Hengelosestraat 99
7500 AA Enschede, The Netherlands
ph +31 53 4874553 fx +31 53 4874335
email deby@itc.nl