On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 08:26:47AM +0000, Thom Brown wrote: > On 23 February 2012 07:15, Gianni Ciolli <gianni.cio...@2ndquadrant.it> wrote: > > 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). > > Isn't the order of execution alphabetical by trigger name in > PostgreSQL? The Triggers themselves wouldn't be anonymous, we'd still > be naming them. It's the referenced functions that would no longer > need defining, and even those probably won't technically be anonymous > as they'll need cataloguing somewhere.
You're right, sorry. I misread the proposal as "anonymous triggers" when instead it is "(named) triggers each implemented via an anonymous function". 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
