| From: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: tg_trigtuple/tg_newtuple settings in AFTER triggers |
| Date: | 2006-08-03 21:00:19 |
| Message-ID: | 20060803210019.GA17545@winnie.fuhr.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 12:05:23PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> writes:
> > Set tg_trigtuple/tg_newtuple in AFTER triggers according to whether
> > old and new tuples were supplied rather than blindly setting them
> > according to the event type. Per discussion in pgsql-hackers.
>
> Looks good, applied.
Thanks. Alvaro made the following suggestion but didn't copy the
list -- shall I do what he suggested and submit the changes as
another patch?
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I'd add an Assert() on the second hunk to make sure newtuple is only set
> in UPDATE. And also a comment on top of the "if" to explain why.
--
Michael Fuhr
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-03 21:04:47 | Re: User-defined typle similar to char(length) varchar(length) |
| Previous Message | Ron Mayer | 2006-08-03 20:52:28 | Re: O_NOATIME |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-03 21:14:36 | Re: tg_trigtuple/tg_newtuple settings in AFTER triggers |
| Previous Message | Andrew Hammond | 2006-08-03 18:14:04 | Re: Replication Documentation |