Re: PL/pgSQL: FOUND is NULL, not false, in event trigger functions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: Jeevan Chalke <jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PL/pgSQL: FOUND is NULL, not false, in event trigger functions
Date: 2026-10-26 21:16:13
Message-ID: 851682.1793049373@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> writes:
> Ah, I misread and thought you were advocating for what you clearly wanted to
> avoid. Given the lack of complaints then +1 for at most fixing in 19.
> Backpatching takes a non-trivial amount of time, which really isn't a commodity
> we have plenty of.

Done that way, then.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Álvaro Herrera 2026-10-26 21:17:16 Re: Do we need an index on pg_constraint.confrelid?
Previous Message Greg Burd 2026-10-26 20:50:26 Re: [PATCH] regression test: view and rule definitions must round trip