Re: [HACKERS] Updating column on row update
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au>, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>, Thom Brown <thombrown@gmail.com>, PGSQL Mailing List <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2009-11-23T05:19:14Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers, pgsql-general
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: > Part of the motivation for allowing inline blocks was to allow for > conditional logic. I don't think that argument really applies to this case, because the complaint was about not being sure if plpgsql is installed. If it isn't, you can hardly use a plpgsql DO block to fix it. (Is anyone up for revisiting the perennial topic of whether to install plpgsql by default? Andrew's argument does suggest that DO might offer a new consideration in that tradeoff.) regards, tom lane