On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 12:06 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Okay, pushed that way.
>
> We can redo this if/when we add support for cloning BEFORE row triggers,
> which are going to need the trigger link info, I suspect.
Yeah, having an explicit representation seems less likely to be
fragile.
On 2018-Jun-29, Amit Langote wrote:
> On 2018/06/29 6:23, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > On 6/28/18 22:52, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >>> Couldn't psql chase the pg_depend links to find inherited triggers?
> >>
> >> Yeah, I thought this would be exceedingly ugly, but apparently it's not
> >> *that* bad
On 2018/06/29 6:23, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 6/28/18 22:52, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> Couldn't psql chase the pg_depend links to find inherited triggers?
>>
>> Yeah, I thought this would be exceedingly ugly, but apparently it's not
>> *that* bad -- see the attached patch, which relies on the
On 6/28/18 22:52, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Couldn't psql chase the pg_depend links to find inherited triggers?
>
> Yeah, I thought this would be exceedingly ugly, but apparently it's not
> *that* bad -- see the attached patch, which relies on the fact that
> triggers don't otherwise depend on
On 6/27/18 23:01, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Another angle is that we're already in beta3 and there may be concerns
> about altering catalog definition this late in the cycle. Anybody?
> Maybe psql can just match tgisinternal triggers by name, and if one
> match occurs then we assume it's a clone
On 2018-Jun-28, David Rowley wrote:
> On 28 June 2018 at 09:01, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Another angle is that we're already in beta3 and there may be concerns
> > about altering catalog definition this late in the cycle. Anybody?
> > Maybe psql can just match tgisinternal triggers by name,
On 28 June 2018 at 09:01, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Another angle is that we're already in beta3 and there may be concerns
> about altering catalog definition this late in the cycle. Anybody?
> Maybe psql can just match tgisinternal triggers by name, and if one
> match occurs then we assume it's a