Re: Statement-level triggers and inheritance

Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> > On Thursday 15 January 2009 02:08:42 Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> Added to TODO:
> >> Have statement-level triggers fire for all tables in an
> >> inheritance hierarchy
> 
> > I don't think that was really the conclusion from the thread.
> 
> > As far as I can interpret the opinions, statement level triggers should fire 
> > on the parent table only, rather than on some child, as it currently does.
> 
> I think the consensus was that each table should have its own statement
> triggers (if any) fire.  Which is one possible reading of Bruce's TODO
> item, but it's surely not clearly worded.

Sorry I had that wording wrong;  TODO updated to:
When statement-level triggers are defined on a parent table, have themfire only on the parent table, and fire child
tabletriggers only whereappropriate
 

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +