Message-ID: <93C04F1F5173D211A27900105AA8FCFC1454CC@lambic.prevuenet.com>
From: Michael J Davis <michael.j.davis@tvguide.com>
To: "'Adam H. Pendleton'" <apendleton@vgsinc.com>, pgsql-sql@hub.org
Subject: RE: [SQL] Trigger question
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 13:41:41 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

I would not store the last name in the employee_payroll table.  I the
primary should be something like an employee_id.  This would eliminate the
need to update the employee_payroll table every time an employee name
changes.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Adam H. Pendleton [SMTP:apendleton@vgsinc.com]
> Sent:	Monday, May 10, 1999 11:38 AM
> To:	pgsql-sql@hub.org
> Subject:	[SQL] Trigger question
> 
> I have a dilema, and I'm not sure what the best way to go about solving it
> is.  I have a table called employee_master, and a table called
> employee_payroll.  The primary key for both tables is the employee name.
> It
> would be easy for me to set up a trigger that checked the master table
> when
> inserting into the payroll table to make sure the employee exists. My
> problem is this:  The employee names are stored Last, First in both
> tables.
> The data file I am parsing to insert into the payroll table contains just
> the last name.  Now I can make a trigger that uses a 'like' and checks the
> employees division as well to ensure that they are in the employee_master,
> but how do I update with just the last name?  I don't want to insert, I
> need
> to be able to update the data in the row.
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
> 
>