Re: [DOCS] Confusing Trigger Docs.
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [DOCS] Confusing Trigger Docs. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAH2-WzkiHHJue-DRt_zdSvKXJFUU=7CNdxkA31m1Vmyr5G2Jcg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [DOCS] Confusing Trigger Docs. (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [DOCS] Confusing Trigger Docs.
|
Список | pgsql-docs |
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 6:25 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 08:07:10PM +0000, neil@fairwindsoft.com wrote: >> The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: >> >> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/trigger-definition.html >> Description: >> >> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/trigger-definition.html >> >> This sentence: >> >> "If an INSERT contains an ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE clause, it is possible that >> the effects of all row-level BEFORE INSERT triggers and all row-level BEFORE >> UPDATE triggers can both be applied in a way that is apparent from the final >> state of the updated row, if an EXCLUDED column is referenced." >> >> is very hard to digest. EXCLUDED.* is exactly what the name suggests -- the tuple that was not inserted because of a conflict. So, naturally it has the effects of any before insert trigger, and carries them forward. But you still have before triggers on the update side. Typically, this won't matter at all, because before triggers tend to be written in an idempotent fashion -- something gets filled in. But I can imagine cases where it is not idempotent, and apply a before update trigger modifies the row in a way that is surprising. Just because ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE was used rather than UPDATE. That's what the documentation warns about. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: