| From: | Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Amit Khandekar <amit(dot)khandekar(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: delta relations in AFTER triggers |
| Date: | 2014-08-27 16:51:40 |
| Message-ID: | 53FE0C9C.5000209@nasby.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 8/27/14, 2:23 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Does this make sense? In essence, make the relations work like PL/pgSQL variables do. If you squint a little, the new/old relation is a variable from the function's point of view, and a parameter from the planner/executor's point of view. It's just a variable/parameter that holds a set of tuples, instead of a single Datum.
Something to keep in mind is that users will definitely think about NEW/OLD as tables. I suspect that it won't be long after release before someone asks why they can't create an index on it. :)
--
Jim C. Nasby, Data Architect jim(at)nasby(dot)net
512.569.9461 (cell) http://jim.nasby.net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2014-08-27 16:53:28 | Re: Similar to csvlog but not really, json logs? |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2014-08-27 16:41:15 | Re: postgresql latency & bgwriter not doing its job |