From: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
---|---|
To: | Dani Oderbolz <oderbolz(at)ecologic(dot)de> |
Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: SEQUENCE and PRIMARY KEY |
Date: | 2003-07-03 12:22:17 |
Message-ID: | 1057234937.30368.26.camel@jester |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
> >A trigger (maybe a rule) is the way to go about this.
> >
> >The alternative is to teach the bad clients to use DEFAULT rather than
> >NULL when they expect the GENERATOR to create the value for them.
> >
> Hmm, Rod, there really seems a demand for the GENERATOR feature :-)
> Do you see any performance problems with a trigger instead of a default?
> I cant imagine that its so much of a difference (ok, depending on the
> trigger, a
> lookup in the catalog is needed, but still it should be fast enough, right?)
A trigger written in C will have similar speeds as processing the
default. Plpgsql isn't that slow, but it is slower -- probably not
noticeably for this operation.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-07-03 16:12:46 | Re: Inquiry From Form [pgsql] |
Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2003-07-03 11:19:17 | Re: Inquiry From Form [pgsql] |