Re: Why no INSTEAD OF triggers on tables?

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why no INSTEAD OF triggers on tables?
Date: 2013-12-17 02:16:24
Message-ID: 52AFB3F8.5080307@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12/16/2013 04:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> I've looked in the archives, but I can't find a reason why INSTEAD OF
>> triggers were never enabled for tables.
>
> What would that mean exactly? And how would you do the actual update
> when it came time to?

Well, I'm specifically thinking of master partition tables. In that
case, we really want an INSTEAD OF trigger.

It seems a little silly that I need to create a separate view, and then
an INSTEAD OF trigger on the view, in order to get a rows-updated count
back from an INSERT which hits a partitioned table.

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message imagenesis@gmail.com 2013-12-17 02:50:02 dpkg-buildpackage fails on 9.2.6 on ubuntu 12.04.3 LTS
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2013-12-17 01:57:51 Re: Race condition in b-tree page deletion