Thread: trigger firing order

tables A and B: a post row trigger on A cause updates on B which has
its own post row trigger.

does the post trigger on A wait until post trigger on B is executed? -
this seems intuitive to me.

does the post trigger on B wait until the trigger on A has completed?

or is post trigger A launched as its own process (in which case who
completes first is indeterminate).

or am I missing this entirely?

pre-row thanks for your insight!



     ____________________________________________________________________________________
Shape Yahoo! in your own image.  Join our Network Research Panel today!
http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
 

"chester c young" <chestercyoung@yahoo.com> writes:

> tables A and B: a post row trigger on A cause updates on B which has
> its own post row trigger.
>
> does the post trigger on A wait until post trigger on B is executed? -
> this seems intuitive to me.

How can it wait until the trigger on B is executed if the trigger on B doesn't
actually get triggered until someone updates B and it's the trigger on A
doing the update?

--  Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com

> > does the post trigger on A wait until post trigger on B is
> executed? -> > this seems intuitive to me.
> 
> How can it wait until the trigger on B is executed if the trigger on
> B doesn't
> actually get triggered until someone updates B and it's the trigger
> on A
> doing the update?

trigger A executes until it updates table B, at which point it does it
pause execution until the post update trigger on table B completes, and
then trigger A resumes at the next statement.


      
____________________________________________________________________________________
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. 
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/