| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: Command Triggers, patch v11 |
| Date: | 2012-03-09 15:05:05 |
| Message-ID: | 29000.1331305505@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> wrote:
>> Sorry, I meant any command trigger. It's because none of the commands
>> can be run on a standby, so the triggers don't seem appropriate.
> I'm not convinced. Right now, it's fairly useless - all the triggers
> could possibly do is throw an error, and an error is going to get
> thrown anyway, so it's only a question of which error message the user
> will see. But we discussed before the idea of adding a capability for
> BEFORE triggers to request that the actual execution of the command
> get skipped, and then it's possible to imagine this being useful.
Um, surely the "you can't do that in a read-only session" error is going
to get thrown long before the command trigger could be called?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thom Brown | 2012-03-09 15:09:04 | Re: Command Triggers, patch v11 |
| Previous Message | Thom Brown | 2012-03-09 15:02:56 | Re: Command Triggers, patch v11 |