"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

Reply via email to