On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 1:54 PM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> On 2018/06/12 22:22, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>> -- create triggers, user may create different trigger functions one
>> for each partition, unless s/he understands that the tables can share
>> trigger functions
>> create function trig_t1p1() returns trigger as $$ begin return new;
>> end;$$ language plpgsql;
>> create trigger trig_t1p1_1 before update on t1p1 execute procedure trig_t1p1();
>> create trigger trig_t1p1_2 before update on t1p1 execute procedure trig_t1p1();
>>
>> create function trig_t1p2() returns trigger as $$ begin return new;
>> end;$$ language plpgsql;
>> create trigger trig_t1p2 before update on t1p2 execute procedure trig_t1p2();
>>
>> When this schema gets upgraded to v12 or whatever version supports
>> BEFORE ROW triggers on a partitioned table and the user tries to
>> create a trigger on a partitioned table
>> 1. somehow the code has to detect that there are already triggers on
>> the partitions so no need to create new triggers on the partitions. I
>> don't see how this can be done, unless the user is smart enough to use
>> the same trigger function for all partitions.
>>
>> 2. user has to drop those triggers and trigger functions and create
>> trigger on the partitioned table.
>>
>> May be I am underestimating users but I am sure there will be some
>> users who will end up with scenario.
>
> Hmm, if a user *knowingly* makes triggers on different partitions call
> different functions, then they wouldn't want to use the feature to create
> the trigger on partitioned tables, because that feature implies same
> trigger definition for all partitions.
How many users would do that *knowingly*?
>
> Maybe, just as a reminder to users, we could mention in the docs that it
> is in fact possible to call the same function from different triggers
> (that is, triggers defined on different partitions) and that's what they
> should do if they intend to later use the feature to define that same
> trigger on the partitioned table.
+1 for something like this, but wording is important.
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company