Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 1:42 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Could we solve it by saying that triggers on partitioned tables aren't
>> allowed to change the partitioning values? (Or at least, not allowed
>> to change them in a way that changes the target partition.)
> That seems like a somewhat-unfortunate restriction.
Perhaps, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around what the
semantics ought to be. If a trigger on partition A changes the keys
so that the row shouldn't have gone into A at all, what then? That
trigger should never have fired, eh?
regards, tom lane
