| From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: FOR EACH ROW triggers, on partitioend tables, with indexes? |
| Date: | 2022-09-06 03:53:46 |
| Message-ID: | CAApHDvrmhE7eS2X2UQ0Rbcq7Z+3CU5NJUPamMsQrhxP=+4APhw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 1 Sept 2022 at 20:57, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> So apparently the way to get a trigger associated with a relation
> (tgconstrrelid) is via CREATE CONSTRAINT TRIGGER, but there doesn't
> appear to be a way to have it associated with a specific *index* on that
> relation (tgconstrindid). So you're right that it appears to be dead
> code.
>
> If the regression tests don't break by removing it, I agree with doing
> that.
Thanks for having a look here. Yeah, it was a while ago.
I've pushed a patch to remove the dead code from master. I don't quite
see the sense in removing it in the back branches.
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | shiy.fnst@fujitsu.com | 2022-09-06 04:00:47 | RE: Handle infinite recursion in logical replication setup |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2022-09-06 03:17:24 | Re: Reducing the chunk header sizes on all memory context types |