Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > Kenneth Marshall wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 06:05:26PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> >>> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> >>>>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> "Minimal" really fails to convey the point here IMHO. How about >>>>>> something like "suppress_no_op_updates_trigger"? >>>>>> >>>> I think it means something to us, but "no op" is a very technical >>>> phrase >>>> that probably doesn't travel very well. >>>> >>> Agreed --- I was hoping someone could improve on that part. The only >>> other words I could come up with were "empty" and "useless", neither of >>> which seem quite le mot juste ... >>> >>> regards, tom lane >>> >>> >> redundant? >> >> >> > > I think I like this best of all the suggestions - > suppress_redundant_updates_trigger() is what I have now. > > If there's no further discussion, I'll go ahead and commit this in a day > or two.
Nitpicking, but you have: + <para> + Currently <productname>PostgreSQL</> provides one built in trigger + function, <function>suppress_redundant_updates_trigger</>, Should we perhaps mention the fulltext triggers (with the appropriate links) here? If it's intended to be an authoritative list of the "userspace" triggers we ship, I think that may be a good idea. //Magnus -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
