Re: [QUESTIONS] Re: [HACKERS] text should be a blob field

From: jwieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck)
To: psqlhack(at)maidast(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk (Peter T Mount)
Cc: jwieck(at)debis(dot)com, maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us, Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)telecom(dot)at, pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org
Subject: Re: [QUESTIONS] Re: [HACKERS] text should be a blob field
Date: 1998-03-16 07:56:58
Message-ID: m0yEUlX-000BFRC@orion.SAPserv.Hamburg.dsh.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Peter Mount wrote:
>
> On Wed, 4 Mar 1998, Jan Wieck wrote:
>
> > I think triggers are more appropriate.
> >
>
> I'm begining to agree with you here.
>
> So far, I've got the trigger to work, so if a row of a table is deleted,
> or an oid referencing a BLOB is updated, then the old BLOB is deleted.
> This removes the orphaned BLOB problem.
>
> The only problem I have now, is:
>
> How to get a trigger to be automatically created on a table when the
> table is created. This would be required, so the end user doesn't have
> to do this (normally from within an application).
>
> This would be required, esp. for expanding the text type (or memo, or
> whatever).

So you think of a new type that automatically causes trigger
definition if used in CREATE/ALTER TABLE.

Agree - would be a nice feature.

Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#======================================== jwieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck) #

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vadim B. Mikheev 1998-03-16 08:09:07 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [QUESTIONS] Does Storage Manager support >2GB tables?
Previous Message Jan Wieck 1998-03-16 07:39:22 Re: [HACKERS] Re: PL/PgSQL discussion