| From: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(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: | 2014-09-25 01:58:32 |
| Message-ID: | 542376C8.5070000@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/28/2014 05:03 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> I don't have to squint that hard -- I've always been comfortable
> with the definition of a table as a relation variable, and it's not
> too big a stretch to expand that to a tuplestore. ;-) In fact, I
> will be surprised if someone doesn't latch onto this to create a
> new "declared temporary table" that only exists within the scope of
> a compound statement (i.e., a BEGIN/END block). You would DECLARE
> them just like you would a scalar variable in a PL, and they would
> have the same scope.
>
> I'll take a look at doing this in the next couple days, and see
> whether doing it that way is as easy as it seems on the face of it.
Oracle's TABLE variables in PL/SQL are quite similar; it might be worth
observing how they work for comparison.
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2014-09-25 02:03:11 | Re: Immediate standby promotion |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2014-09-24 23:04:54 | Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization) |