Re: plperl - put schema-name in $_TD

On Wed, 24 May 2006 10:12:17 -0400, Andrew wrote:

> Patches should be made against the HEAD branch in CVS, not against a
> distro source.

Ok; I'll do that. (The patch did apply cleanly to CVS, though, but
anyway).

On Wed, 24 May 2006 15:41:07 -0400, Tom wrote:

> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:

>> This seems like a good idea, but we should probably make analogous
>> changes for plpgsql, pltcl and plpython. Having different trigger data
>> available in some of these doesn't seem like a good idea.

> Yeah. I'm also a little disturbed by using "nspname" which is an
> entirely internal name; plus it's a bit unclear *which* schema it's
> supposed to be. (One might think it's the schema the trigger function
> is in, for instance.) Somebody established a bad precedent by using
> "relname" for the table name.

I wasn't sure what to call it, so I modelled my change after relname ~
SPI_getrelname and arrived at the questionable nspname ~ SPI_getnspname.

> Maybe we should use field names like "table_name" and "table_schema".
> "relname" could be kept around for awhile but deprecated as a duplicate
> of "table_name".

On Thu, 25 May 2006 16:06:12 -0000, Greg wrote:

> +1 for table_schema and table_name, especially if in the future we provide
> things like trigger_schema.

I've attached a new patch, against CVS, that adds table_name and
table_schema instead, and updates the doc accordingly.

I haven't looked at the other languages as I do not use them; let me
know if I should take a stab at providing patches for them as well.

Thanks for your comments.

Best regards,

Adam

--
"Our hero regains consciousness at the feet of a Adam Sjøgren
sarcastic alien..." asjo(at)koldfront(dot)dk