Tom Lane schrieb:
=?ISO-8859-15?Q?Torsten_Z=FChlsdorff?= writes:
I have defined an BEFORE UPDATE trigger. The trigger catch every update,
change some columns of the new row, make an insert of the new row and
returns null to abort the update.
Why in the world would you do that? Just return t
=?ISO-8859-15?Q?Torsten_Z=FChlsdorff?= writes:
> I have defined an BEFORE UPDATE trigger. The trigger catch every update,
> change some columns of the new row, make an insert of the new row and
> returns null to abort the update.
Why in the world would you do that? Just return the modified row
Hey Dmitriy,
thanks for your reply.
I think, its would be better to use rule on update instead of the trigger
in such case as you.
I've played the whole weekend with the rule-system, but it didn't work
for my case. I have a dynamic trigger, which takes cares about revision
of rows for every
Hello,
i have a non-trival problem and i do not believe that it is solvable.
I have defined an BEFORE UPDATE trigger. The trigger catch every update,
change some columns of the new row, make an insert of the new row and
returns null to abort the update.
All fine till here :)
Now the problem:
