| From: | Peter Eisentraut <e99re41(at)DoCS(dot)UU(dot)SE> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jan Wieck <wieck(at)debis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] update_pg_pwd |
| Date: | 1999-12-13 11:15:06 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.GSO.4.02A.9912131213110.8544-100000@Panter.DoCS.UU.SE |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 13 Dec 1999, Jan Wieck wrote:
> Trigger functions should allways return at least a NULL
> pointer of type HeapTuple, not be declared void. From this I
> assume it's an AFTER ROW trigger,
Must be after row, because it has to wait until the change is actually
written to pg_shadow. Better would be an AFTER STATEMENT is assume.
> There are already some exceptions coded into the test. These
> are PL handlers. Since their real return value is HeapTuple,
> you would have to make this defined special type not
> selectable in another way. So why do you want?
I'm not sure I'm following you, but why would a function that doesn't have
a useful return value return one?
--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders vaeg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 1999-12-13 11:25:28 | Re: [HACKERS] Datatype MONEY |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 1999-12-13 11:12:42 | Re: [HACKERS] update_pg_pwd |