Re: How to fire triggers just on "top" level DML

From: "A(dot)M(dot)" <agentm(at)themactionfaction(dot)com>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: How to fire triggers just on "top" level DML
Date: 2011-01-19 22:26:40
Message-ID: 32198913-CFE4-4426-A97A-D96587B3511F@themactionfaction.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


On Jan 19, 2011, at 4:59 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:

> We've been running for about ten years on a framework which fires
> triggers similar to database triggers in a Java tier close to the
> database, and we're now trying to convert these to actual PostgreSQL
> database triggers. Our biggest hitch at the moment is that we
> defined a class of triggers we called "top" triggers, which only
> fire from DML submitted by the application, not from DML issued by
> other triggers.
>
> One significant use of this is to block direct modification of
> summary data (either selected columns or entire tables) which are
> supposed to be trigger maintained. It's not immediately obvious how
> to accomplish this within PostgreSQL, although I'm probably missing
> something. We're not tied to any particular methodology -- a
> TG_DEPTH variable, if it existed, would do fine, for example.
>
> Any suggestions?

Most PLs include some session-specific storage. In PL/Perl, it is %_SHARED. Setting a flag there should do the trick. If you are using a PL which does not have such a notion (like plpgsql), you can add a call in your triggers to a function written in a PL which does support this. Alternatively, a C function which sets/checks a global flag would work as well.

Cheers,
M

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-01-19 22:29:15 Re: undefined symbol PQconnectionNeedsPassword referenced by file pg_ctl.o
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2011-01-19 22:20:35 Re: How to fire triggers just on "top" level DML