"Rolf A. de By" <deby@itc.nl> writes: > Thanks for that. There is some misunderstanding here. For this example, > I had taken the sting out of my trigger function and turned it into a > much more concise no-op, with warnings. The actual code of my original > trigger function is irrelevant. The no-op trigger function displays the > same strange behaviour: it works as expected for INSERTs, but not for > UPDATEs. The update goes through! And it shouldn't. Reading between the lines, I gather you have an inheritance setup and are expecting a trigger on the parent table to fire for events occurring in the child tables. Doesn't work like that; you need to put triggers on the child tables. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

"Rolf A. de By" <deby@itc.nl> writes: > Yes, this is an inheritance set-up. But actually no: I am executing all > my data changes against the parent table, and want the trigger on that > parent table to fire for an insert on the parent table as it does. But > I also want the trigger to fire when an update on the parent table is > executed, and this does not happen. There is no update on any row in the parent table. The update is on a row in a child table. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster