| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Harald Fuchs <hf99(at)protecting(dot)net>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Trigger question |
| Date: | 2004-01-20 16:02:29 |
| Message-ID: | 24300.1074614549@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> writes:
> On Tuesday 20 January 2004 00:01, Neil Conway wrote:
>> Yeah, I didn't get around to implementing that. If anyone wants this
>> feature, I'd encourage them to step up to the plate -- I'm not sure
>> when I'll get the opportunity/motivation to implement this myself.
> I didn't think they'd be meaningful for a statement-level trigger. Surely
> OLD/NEW are by definition row-level details.
According to the complainants, OLD/NEW are commonly available as
recordsets (tables) inside a statement trigger. I'm not very clear on
how that works myself --- in particular, one would think it important to
be able to work with corresponding pairs of OLD and NEW rows, which
would be painful with a table-like abstraction. Can anyone explain
exactly how it's done in, say, Oracle?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Harald Fuchs | 2004-01-20 16:15:31 | Re: Trigger question |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2004-01-20 15:17:24 | Re: Trigger question |