Re: Trigger function returning null

Tom Lane wrote:

>Why not?
>
>The real answer is "it's historical and I didn't see any need to
>change it". But one could argue that a function returning NULL
>doesn't know it's supposed to be a trigger.
>
>
The reason I ask is that this behavior just bit me in PL/Java. Triggers
returning null didn't work. I've fixed it at my end by simply forcing
the isnull to false for triggers. I just wanted to know if there was
some deeper thought behind this that could result in side effects.

Perhaps you should either change this behavior or make a note it in
"Writing Trigger Functions in C"? Even if the documented example use a
local isnull, it's not evident that you have to do that.

Regards,

Thomas Hallgren