Re: Possible pl/pgsql bug
От | Peter Darley |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Possible pl/pgsql bug |
Дата | |
Msg-id | NNEAICKPNOGDBHNCEDCPCEMICHAA.pdarley@kinesis-cem.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Possible pl/pgsql bug (Jan Wieck <janwieck@yahoo.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
Jan, I find it very useful to have tables that are basically identical except for one field that holds a different type of data. It allows me to automate a lot of stuff in my application and not have to tell it weather it is going to get back Boolean, text, date, interval etc. data. Similarly it would be nice to have as few objects in the db as possible, just so it's easier to understand and manage. Anyway, I take it that this is not a bug and I'll create separate trigger functions for each of my tables. :) Thanks for getting back to me so quickly! Peter Darley -----Original Message----- From: Jan Wieck [mailto:janwieck@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 1:23 PM To: Peter Darley Cc: Pgsql-General Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Possible pl/pgsql bug Peter Darley wrote: > Friends, > I don't know if this is a bug or not, but it does seem a bit weird. > > When I have a pl/pgsql trigger function it seems to cache the data types of Indeed, it does. While it sometimes does make sense to use one and the same function for multiple triggers, I don't see it in this case. And IMHO it's a bit bogus anyway if attributes with different meaning and datatype in two tables have the same name. Could be irritating at least. I suggest writing separate trigger functions. Jan -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: