On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 13:28 +0000, Dean Rasheed wrote: > >> It works for all kinds of trigger events, >> and is intended as a complete drop-in replacement for the after >> triggers queue. > >> > All of those seem false in the general case. What will you do? >> >> At this point I'm looking for more feedback as to whether any of this >> is a show-stopper, before I expend more effort on this patch. > > I see no show stoppers, only for you to look at ways of specifying that > this optimization is possible for particular cases. I think we might be > able to make the general statement that it will work for all after > triggers that execute STABLE or IMMUTABLE functions. I don't think we > can assume that firing order is irrelevant for some cases, e.g. message > queues.
Hmm. After-trigger functions are very unlikely to really be STABLE or IMMUTABLE, though. Almost by definition, they'd better be modifying some data somewhere, or there's no point. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
