Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: foreign keys and RI triggers

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>,pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: foreign keys and RI triggers
Date: 2005-05-27 14:21:18
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Because (a) it needs all the same arguments

Well, it needs the Trigger that we're in the process of queueing, the 
old tuple, the new tuple, and the updated relation. It doesn't need the 
rest of the content of TriggerData. trigger.c has to manually construct 
a TriggerData to pass to it, so it's not like it's a notational convenience.

> (b) it can share infrastructure with the other RI triggers.

Such as? I don't see anything it allows us to share.


In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2005-05-27 14:24:31
Subject: Re: A 2 phase commit weirdness
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-05-27 14:20:23
Subject: Re: Multiple-statement Rules Incompatible With Constraints

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group