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

Re: Partitioning feature ...

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Nikhil Sontakke <nikhil(dot)sontakke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, Kedar Potdar <kedar(dot)potdar(at)gmail(dot)com>, Emmanuel Cecchet <manu(at)asterdata(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Amit Gupta <amit(dot)pc(dot)gupta(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Partitioning feature ...
Date: 2009-03-31 15:59:45
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
>> We already have system triggers -- the FK triggers.  I don't think we've
>> had all that much trouble with them.
> In the case of the FK triggers, it's intentional (and maybe even
> documented) that users should be able to place their own triggers before
> or after the FK triggers. 

If it's documented I think it's well hidden ;-) ISTM that the fact that 
we implement FK constraints via triggers is really an implementation 
detail, not something the user should be encouraged to mess with.

>  Is there a good reason why partitioning
> triggers should be different?  

Probably not. ISTM that the scheme should turn tgisconstraint into a 
multi-valued item (tgkind: 'u' = userland, 'c'= constraint, 'p' = 
partition or some such).



In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Greg StarkDate: 2009-03-31 16:08:45
Subject: Re: string_to_array with empty input
Previous:From: David E. WheelerDate: 2009-03-31 15:56:32
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] string_to_array with empty input

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