| From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Marko Tiikkaja <pgmail(at)joh(dot)to>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PL/PgSQL STRICT |
| Date: | 2012-12-21 16:28:49 |
| Message-ID: | CAFj8pRBYyrqs0_aERuqwrwarmbpiN2OKafij1HjAPHa6jk6CEg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2012/12/21 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Marko Tiikkaja <pgmail(at)joh(dot)to> writes:
>> Another idea would be to force the STRICT to be immediately after
>> INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE.
>
> What about before it, ie
>
> STRICT UPDATE ...
>
> This should dodge the problem of possible conflict with table names,
> and it seems to me to read more naturally too.
+1
Pavel
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marko Tiikkaja | 2012-12-21 16:29:56 | Re: PL/PgSQL STRICT |
| Previous Message | Charles Gomes | 2012-12-21 16:25:03 | Writing Trigger Functions in C |