Re: Partitioning feature ...
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Partitioning feature ... |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 49D23DF1.5000809@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Partitioning feature ... (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Partitioning feature ...
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: >> We already have system triggers -- the FK triggers. I don't think we've >> had all that much trouble with them. >> > > In the case of the FK triggers, it's intentional (and maybe even > documented) that users should be able to place their own triggers before > or after the FK triggers. If it's documented I think it's well hidden ;-) ISTM that the fact that we implement FK constraints via triggers is really an implementation detail, not something the user should be encouraged to mess with. > Is there a good reason why partitioning > triggers should be different? > Probably not. ISTM that the scheme should turn tgisconstraint into a multi-valued item (tgkind: 'u' = userland, 'c'= constraint, 'p' = partition or some such). cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: