Tom Lane wrote:
You seem to have also done a fair amount of unrelated hacking around.
What's the point of removing the distinction between check_ins and
check_upd functions?

I talked about this in an earlier message to -hackers: check_upd was actually unused (check_ins was used for both inserts and updates).

I think that may confuse existing client code
that looks at the triggers, without really buying much.  A possibly
stronger argument is that if we find down the road that we need
separate functions again, we'll be in a bit of a sticky place; at
least if we need it to fix a bug without forcing initdb.

Hmm, I suppose -- if you prefer I can have check_ins called by the INSERT trigger and check_upd called by the UPDATE trigger, which probably makes more sense.


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to