From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Command Triggers |
Date: | 2012-01-18 21:23:14 |
Message-ID: | m2pqegg0xp.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Huh, isn't it simpler to just pass the triggers the parse tree *after*
> parse analysis? I don't understand what you're doing here.
I didn't realize that the parse analysis is in fact done from within
standard_ProcessUtility() directly, which means your suggestion is
indeed workable.
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> It's not the costs I'm worried about so much as the side effects ---
Ok, so I'm now calling the command trigger procedures once the parse
analysis is done, and guess what, I'm back to the same problem as
before:
https://github.com/dimitri/postgres/commit/4bfab6344a554c09f7322e861f9d09468f641bd9
CREATE TABLE public."ab_foo-bar"
(
id serial NOT NULL,
foo integer default 1,
PRIMARY KEY(id)
);
NOTICE: CREATE TABLE will create implicit sequence "ab_foo-bar_id_seq" for serial column "ab_foo-bar.id"
NOTICE: snitch: CREATE SEQUENCE
ERROR: unrecognized node type: 904
I'm not sure about the next step, and I'm quite sure I need to stop here
for tonight. Any advice welcome, I'll be working on that again as soon
as tomorrow.
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | YAMAMOTO Takashi | 2012-01-18 21:38:44 | Re: gistVacuumUpdate |
Previous Message | Marti Raudsepp | 2012-01-18 21:23:01 | Re: Patch review for logging hooks (CF 2012-01) |