Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Cc: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew@dunslane.net>, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, "Scott Marlowe" <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>, "Thom Brown" <thombrown@gmail.com>, "PGSQL Mailing List" <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, "Craig Ringer" <craig@postnewspapers.com.au>
Date: 2009-11-24T19:29:20Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers, pgsql-general
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> writes: > Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Yes, I'd expect the user to custom-code it, because it's not clear >> exactly which properties the script would be depending on and which >> ones it's okay to allow to vary. To take just one example, is it >> okay if the object ownership is different from current user? > Yeah, that's an area which I figured would require some discussion. > The best behavior isn't immediately clear to me in that regard. I > didn't figure that arriving at some decision on that was necessarily > an insurmountable obstacle. The reason a script-driven solution seems attractive is exactly that there doesn't seem to be a good one-size-fits-all behavior for complex objects. > There was, up-thread, discussion by multiple people of the desire to > have CINE for tables. Andrew's example was specifically about an > alternative way of spelling that. This branch of the thread has been > all about exactly that. (Well, at least in my head.) I thought the thread was about CREATE LANGUAGE. If you want to discuss CINE in general it would probably be appropriate to start a different thread about that. regards, tom lane