Re: The relative stability of different procedural languages

From: "BigSmoke" <bigsmoke(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: The relative stability of different procedural languages
Date: 2006-12-07 22:28:20
Message-ID: 1165530500.716867.187070@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Dec 7, 11:07 pm, mmonc(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)gmail(dot)com ("Merlin Moncure") wrote:
> On 7 Dec 2006 14:02:53 -0800, BigSmoke <bigsm(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > I'm facing a particular task for which I need any procedural language
> > but PL/PgSQL. I can't use PL/PgSQL because it doesn't allow me to use
> > local variables such as new and old from a dynamic command.

> could you clarify what you are trying to do and why pl/pgsql cant do it?

I'm dealing with a trigger function which needs to check the nullness
of a column in 'new' and 'old'. The catch is that the trigger function
needs to take the name of that column as an argument. (I've tried a
kludge which stores 'new' and 'old' in a temporary table, but this
kludge seems too unreliable to trust.)

- Rowan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message BigSmoke 2006-12-07 22:35:43 Re: The relative stability of different procedural
Previous Message Oleg Bartunov 2006-12-07 22:27:59 Re: tsearch2: pg8.1 to pg8.2