Re: Why are triggers semi-deferred?

From: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
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: Why are triggers semi-deferred?
Date: 2003-05-05 16:14:52
Message-ID: 5.1.0.14.0.20030506021411.0552fe80@mail.rhyme.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At 12:09 PM 5/05/2003 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>think of it as a 7.4 proposal,
>instead. (Or maybe 7.5, considering how close the 7.4 feature freeze
>date is.)

Good point. How close is it? It would be good to see this fixed in 7.4.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner | __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498) | /(@) ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81 | _________ \
Fax: (+61) 03 5330 3172 | ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \|
| --________--
PGP key available upon request, | /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Philip Warner 2003-05-05 16:23:54 Re: Why are triggers semi-deferred?
Previous Message Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD 2003-05-05 16:13:57 Re: Transform groups (more FE/BE protocol issues)