Re: minimal update

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Kenneth Marshall wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 06:05:26PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Minimal" really fails to convey the point here IMHO. How about
>>>>>> something like "suppress_no_op_updates_trigger"?
>>>>>>
>>>> I think it means something to us, but "no op" is a very technical
>>>> phrase
>>>> that probably doesn't travel very well.
>>>>
>>> Agreed --- I was hoping someone could improve on that part. The only
>>> other words I could come up with were "empty" and "useless", neither of
>>> which seem quite le mot juste ...
>>>
>>> regards, tom lane
>>>
>>>
>> redundant?
>>
>>
>>
>
> I think I like this best of all the suggestions -
> suppress_redundant_updates_trigger() is what I have now.
>
> If there's no further discussion, I'll go ahead and commit this in a day
> or two.

Nitpicking, but you have:
+ <para>
+ Currently <productname>PostgreSQL</> provides one built in trigger
+ function, <function>suppress_redundant_updates_trigger</>,

Should we perhaps mention the fulltext triggers (with the appropriate
links) here? If it's intended to be an authoritative list of the
"userspace" triggers we ship, I think that may be a good idea.

//Magnus