From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | petermpallesen(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Not using suppress_redundant_updates_trigger in sql-createtrigger.html#examples |
Date: | 2020-06-16 14:08:14 |
Message-ID: | 1300920.1592316494@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> I have created the attached patch to mention
> suppress_redundant_updates_trigger() in this case. I don't think having
> an actual example is warranted.
I don't like this patch, because in fact
suppress_redundant_updates_trigger is entirely unrelated to the stated
purpose of that example (namely, to log something if the table was
changed). The way you've written it makes it sound like
suppress_redundant_updates_trigger could be used as an alternative
implementation of that requirement.
If you want to mention suppress_redundant_updates_trigger somewhere
in this area, that's fine, but it should be treated as an independent
topic rather than being wedged into the middle of an unrelated example.
Maybe a distinct para saying something like "To suppress no-op updates
of a table, see suppress_redundant_updates_trigger." (and making that
an actual link would be a good idea).
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2020-06-16 16:41:08 | Re: Not using suppress_redundant_updates_trigger in sql-createtrigger.html#examples |
Previous Message | PG Doc comments form | 2020-06-16 12:53:50 | PGTYPESinterval_free should be instead PGTYPESinterval_new in example. |