| From: | Yugo Nagata <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | surya poondla <suryapoondla4(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Add comments about fire_triggers argument in ri_triggers.c |
| Date: | 2026-03-26 15:56:46 |
| Message-ID: | 20260327005646.8b9df4658b2dd510d3f95ec0@sraoss.co.jp |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
Thank you all for the review and comments.
> Yes Amit, I agree that SPI_execute_snapshot() comments do provide some
> context on AFTER triggers, but I still feel the newly added comment
> in ri_PerformCheck() gives additional context on why the fire_triggers is
> set to false.
Yes, that is what I intended. The existing comments on
SPI_execute_snapshot() explain how the fire_triggers parameter works,
but I would like to add a comment explaining why the AFTER trigger for
RI needs to set it to false.
If the explanation of the effect of fire_triggers seems redundant, I am
fine with the following shorter version:
+ * Set fire_triggers to false to ensure that check triggers fire after all
+ * RI updates on the same row are complete.
I've attached an updated version reflecting this.
Regards,
Yugo Nagata
--
Yugo Nagata <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v2-add_comments_fire_triggers_in_ri_triggers.patch | text/x-diff | 704 bytes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dean Rasheed | 2026-03-26 16:00:38 | Re: Allow to collect statistics on virtual generated columns |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2026-03-26 15:41:53 | Re: Adding comments to help understand psql hidden queries |