| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alban Hertroys <haramrae(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SQL functions and triggers? |
| Date: | 2014-11-25 21:24:25 |
| Message-ID: | 20210.1416950665@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Alban Hertroys <haramrae(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> In the past, when writing trigger functions, Ive always used pl/pgsql without giving it a second thought. Today I was modifying a database creation script that was originally intended for Firebird to work with Postgres and the example trigger procedures in there were very close to pure SQL.
> Hence, I started rewriting them as SQL functions, but is that really
> possible?
No, nobody's ever tried to make that work. It could probably be done
with sufficiently many round tuits, but it's not clear that there's
any benefit that would justify the work. Surely dropping some SQL
commands into plpgsql isn't very hard ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Potts | 2014-11-25 21:27:21 | returning only part of a rule set |
| Previous Message | Andy Colson | 2014-11-25 21:19:31 | Re: Best filesystem for a high load db |