Re: Triggered Data Change check

From: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Triggered Data Change check
Date: 2001-11-12 03:40:59
Message-ID: 3BEF44CB.944BB1E4@tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> > Strictly speaking MVCC is only for read-only queries.
> > Even under MVCC, update, delete and select .. for update have
> > to see the newest tuples.
>
> True. But my point is that we already have mechanisms to deal with
> that set of issues; the trigger code shouldn't concern itself with
> the problem.

You are saying
> Therefore we don't need any explicit test for triggered data
> change.

ISTM your point is on the following.

> Functions can run new commands that get new command ID numbers within
> the current transaction --- but on return from the function, the current
> command number is restored. I believe rows inserted by such a function
> would look "in the future" to us at the outer command, and would be
> ignored.

My point is why we could ignore the (future) changes.

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephan Szabo 2001-11-12 03:54:32 Re: Triggered Data Change check
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-11-12 03:11:26 Re: Triggered Data Change check

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephan Szabo 2001-11-12 03:54:32 Re: Triggered Data Change check
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-11-12 03:11:26 Re: Triggered Data Change check