"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I was wondering whether an ALTER TABLE command is really the right way
>> to approach this. If we had an ALTER-type command, presumably the
>> implication is that its effects would be global to all backends. But
>> the uses that I've seen for suspending trigger invocations would be
>> happier with a local, temporary setting that only affects the current
>> backend. Any thoughts about that?
> I may be missing something here, but the only circumstance where i could
> see such being useful would be a load of a database ... other then that,
> how would overriding triggers be considered a good thing?
Well, exactly: it seems like something you'd want to constrain as
tightly as possible. So some kind of local, SET-like operation seems
safer to me than a global, ALTER-TABLE-like operation.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
