On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 02:08:12PM -0800, Stephan Szabo wrote: > Have you considered how this might work with spec-compliant constraint > timing?
I haven't gone so far as to look into the spec, yet. [Noise of rustling papers] However, constraints referenced in an UNLESS clause that are deferred, in any fashion, should probably be "immediated" within the context of the command. Perhaps a WARNING or NOTICE would be appropriately informative if UNLESS were to actually alter the timing of a given constraint. > I think even in inserting cases, a later trigger before statement > end could in some cases un-violate a constraint, so checking before insert > won't actually be the same behavior as the normal constraint handling > which seems bad for this kind of system. Any facility that can alter the tuple before it being inserted into the heap should probably be exercised prior to the application of the tuple against UNLESS's behavior. The implementation of UNLESS will probably completely change ExecConstraints(), which comes after the firing of BEFORE triggers and before heap_insert(). Beyond that, I am not sure what other considerations should be made with respect to triggers. So, UNLESS should/will be applied after BEFORE triggers, but before "non-UNLESS specified" constraints. ;) -- Regards, James William Pye ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings