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