Re: Trigger question
| От | Harald Fuchs |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Trigger question |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | pufzea4mvw.fsf@srv.protecting.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Trigger question (pginfo <pginfo@t1.unisoftbg.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Trigger question
Re: Trigger question |
| Список | pgsql-performance |
In article <24300.1074614549@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com> writes: >> On Tuesday 20 January 2004 00:01, Neil Conway wrote: >>> Yeah, I didn't get around to implementing that. If anyone wants this >>> feature, I'd encourage them to step up to the plate -- I'm not sure >>> when I'll get the opportunity/motivation to implement this myself. >> I didn't think they'd be meaningful for a statement-level trigger. Surely >> OLD/NEW are by definition row-level details. > According to the complainants, OLD/NEW are commonly available as > recordsets (tables) inside a statement trigger. Yes. > I'm not very clear on > how that works myself --- in particular, one would think it important to > be able to work with corresponding pairs of OLD and NEW rows, which > would be painful with a table-like abstraction. Why? If the underlying table has a primary key, finding corresponding pairs is trivial; if there isn't, it's impossible.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: