Re: [GENERAL] After Trigger

2006-09-22 Thread Alban Hertroys
Bob Pawley wrote: I am seeking wording for a procedure that will initiate a trigger only after another trigger has completed its function. In this case I want to drop a table that is created and used by the first trigger. You could just call a function from your trigger, or handle it inside

Re: [GENERAL] After Trigger

2006-09-21 Thread Shane Ambler
On 22/9/2006 2:14, "Bob Pawley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am seeking wording for a procedure that will initiate a trigger only after > another trigger has completed its function. In this case I want to drop a > table that is created and used by the first trigger. Sounds like you should use a

Re: [GENERAL] After Trigger

2006-09-21 Thread Terry Lee Tucker
On Thursday 21 September 2006 12:44 pm, Bob Pawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> thus communicated: --> I am seeking wording for a procedure that will initiate a trigger only after another trigger has completed its function. In this case I want to drop a table that is created and used by the first trigger

[GENERAL] After Trigger

2006-09-21 Thread Bob Pawley
I am seeking wording for a procedure that will initiate a trigger only after another trigger has completed its function. In this case I want to drop a table that is created and used by the first trigger.   Could someone point me to documentation?   Bob Pawley

Re: [GENERAL] after trigger question

2001-03-22 Thread Richard Huxton
From: "Feite Brekeveld" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Stephan Szabo wrote: > > > On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Feite Brekeveld wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I have put an AFTER INSERT TRIGGER on a table. > > > > > > If the triggerfunction fails to do an operation shouldn't the insert > > > already have taken