[quoted text, click to view] >> .. a column "status" [status of what? too vague to be a data element name!] '. When the value of row 1 [sic] changes to 'accepted', the value of the column 'status' in row 2 [sic] should change to 'accepted' too. <<
Rows are not records; fields are not columns; tables are not files;
there is no sequential access or ordering in an RDBMS, so "first",
"second", "row #1 and #2", "next" and "last" are totally meaningless.
What is the logical relationship between these rows, and not their
location in physical storage?
Please post DDL, so that people do not have to guess what the keys,
constraints, Declarative Referential Integrity, data types, etc. in
your schema are. Sample data is also a good idea, along with clear
specifications. It is very hard to debug code when you do not let us
see it.
[quoted text, click to view] >> I've written a trigger that fires on an update of the column 'status'. This trigger then finds the row that belongs to the row that is updated and updates the value of that column in that row. <<
You ought to be able to update a well-defined subset of rows in ONE
update statement. In a file system, you would have to do procedural
code that hits one record at a time. You seem to be "faking it" in
triggers.
[quoted text, click to view] >> Problem: the trigger then fires again on the update of the row that I update in my trigger. <<
This is one of the many reasons we avoid triggers and other procedural
code in favor of set-oriented code and DRI actions.