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

Suggested Triggers & Functions Naming Convention?

From: Bruno Lavoie <bruno(dot)lavoie(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Suggested Triggers & Functions Naming Convention?
Date: 2004-10-31 22:08:37
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-general

i'm etablishing a naming convention for a new project under
postgresql. For tables, sequences, views, that's ok! I used good
naming conventions for this in the past and i'll keep these rules for
the new project.

but, i plan to use a lot of triggers  and functions in this project,
but I'm confused! I know that triggers call already created functions.
But for tracking i must be able to  associate these 2 different object
(IMO; from oracle world a trigger is a trigger, a function is a

is someone have a good way to name normal functions & procedures,
triggers,  trigger functions (function called by triggers)? because,
when i'll list all functions i dont want to be confused with the
complete list.

why is postgresql is not separing code from triggers and functions as
oracle do?
why postgresql  triggers must call functions? 

 - a function is not defined to be called by a trigger (but a trigger
body can call functions)
 - a function intended to be a trigger cannot be called in a select
clause (can i do it in postgres?)

thanx a lot to help me

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2004-10-31 22:42:42
Subject: Re: Daylight Savings Time handling on persistent connections
Previous:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2004-10-31 22:02:58
Subject: Re: Interpolation of environment variables in SQL at runtime?

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