On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 11:43:53AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On 02/17/2012 11:29 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote: > >On Feb 17, 2012, at 5:22 AM, Thom Brown wrote: > >>The purpose being to only have a single statement to set up the > >>trigger rather than setting up a separate trigger function which will > >>unlikely be re-used by other triggers... or is this of dubious > >>benefit? > >+1, though I imagine it would just give it a generated name and save it > >anyway, eh? > Before we rush into this, let's consider all the wrinkles. For > example, what if you need to change the function? And how would you > edit the function in psql? It might be a bit more involved that it > seems at first glance, although my initial reaction was the same as > David's.
Another complication: anonymous triggers would either have to be alone, or provide a mechanism to manage a sequence of anonymous triggers on the same table (such as "replace the third trigger with ..." or "move trigger #4 in position #2", or deciding their order of execution). Cheers, Dr. Gianni Ciolli - 2ndQuadrant Italia PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support gianni.cio...@2ndquadrant.it | www.2ndquadrant.it -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
