From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PL/pgSQL return value in after triggers |
Date: | 2011-02-28 17:12:12 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTinY_zeU85Po0=8Zm25f+z3P8tH0DtoJwqXYNXy9@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> PL/pgSQL trigger functions currently require a value to be returned,
> even though that value is not used for anything in case of a trigger
> fired AFTER. I was wondering if we could relax that. It would make
> things a bit more robust and produce clearer PL/pgSQL code. The
> specific case I'm concerned about is that a trigger function could
> accidentally be run in a BEFORE trigger even though it was not meant for
> that. It is common practice that trigger functions for AFTER triggers
> return NULL, which would have unpleasant effects if used in a BEFORE
> trigger.
>
> I think it is very uncommon to have the same function usable for BEFORE
> and AFTER triggers, so it would be valuable to have coding support
> specifically for AFTER triggers. We could just allow RETURN without
> argument, or perhaps no RETURN at all.
>
> Comments?
It has bugged me for years that after triggers need to contain a
useless RETURN statement, but I'm not sure now is the time to go fix
it.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-02-28 17:20:45 | Re: PL/pgSQL return value in after triggers |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-02-28 17:08:48 | Re: pl/python custom exceptions for SPI |