| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] SQL assertions prototype |
| Date: | 2014-01-05 20:16:21 |
| Message-ID: | 52C9BD95.4010904@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/18/13, 4:04 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Umm, that's really a major limitation in utility. We need to come up
> with a better answer than this, which would essentially hobble the
> facility.
We don't have any facility to run a trigger on just any command, it
needs to be triggered by a table. Of course, that's where your on
commit even triggers come in, presumably. But for example, constraint
triggers support deferrability, which an on commit trigger wouldn't.
We'd just need DML triggers on any/no tables.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2014-01-05 20:25:57 | Re: more psprintf() use |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2014-01-05 20:12:02 | Re: [PATCH] SQL assertions prototype |