From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | Adam Sjøgren <adsj(at)novozymes(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: plperl - put schema-name in $_TD |
Date: | 2006-05-24 19:41:07 |
Message-ID: | 1030.1148499667@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Adam Sjgren wrote:
>> Enclosed is a tiny patch for plperl that puts the schema-name of the
>> current table in $_TD, so triggers can access tables using
>> schemaname.tablename, for instance like so:
> This seems like a good idea, but we should probably make analogous
> changes for plpgsql, pltcl and plpython. Having different trigger data
> available in some of these doesn't seem like a good idea.
Yeah. I'm also a little disturbed by using "nspname" which is an
entirely internal name; plus it's a bit unclear *which* schema it's
supposed to be. (One might think it's the schema the trigger function
is in, for instance.) Somebody established a bad precedent by using
"relname" for the table name.
Maybe we should use field names like "table_name" and "table_schema".
"relname" could be kept around for awhile but deprecated as a duplicate
of "table_name".
Or if that seems too messy, keep "relname" but use "relschema" as the
new field.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joachim Wieland | 2006-05-24 23:51:38 | Re: Allow commenting of variables in postgresql.conf to |
Previous Message | Zdenek Kotala | 2006-05-24 14:27:01 | Re: Allow commenting of variables in postgresql.conf to |