"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Any objections to implementing this?

Only that it was done a long time ago --- see

> It would be even better if there was some way of not executing the
> trigger at all if we knew that the UPDATE statement doesn't SET the FK
> columns.

People keep suggesting that, and the counterexample is always that you
can't know what a BEFORE trigger might do to the row.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?


Reply via email to