| From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Fork <mfork(at)toledolink(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pg_trigger and tgargs |
| Date: | 2000-11-30 23:39:04 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.21.0011301536050.48480-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 30 Nov 2000, Michael Fork wrote:
> I was wondering if someone could tell me if I have gotten the fields of
> tgargs correct:
For foreign key constraints, yes. Other triggers can use tgargs for
whatever they want.
> <unnamed>\000 -- Constraint name?
Yes.
> foreign_table_multi\000 -- table with foreign key(s)
> primary_table_multi\000 -- table with primary key(s)
Yep.
> UNSPECIFIED\000 -- ??
What match type was specified (or unspecified if none was specified).
> foreign_int_1\000 -- 1st field in foreign key
>
> primary_int_1\000 -- 1st field in referenced primary key
>
> foreign_int_2\000 -- 1st field in foreign key
> primary_int_2\000 -- 1st field in referenced primary key
2nd on the latter two, but yes in general
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | The Hermit Hacker | 2000-11-30 23:47:08 | Re: beta testing version |
| Previous Message | Nathan Myers | 2000-11-30 23:35:59 | Re: beta testing version |