On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 7:29 AM, Dimitri Fontaine <dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr> wrote: > Dimitri Fontaine <dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr> writes: >> I added some in the attached patch. >> >> doc/src/sgml/event-trigger.sgml | 10 ++ >> src/backend/commands/event_trigger.c | 6 +- >> src/test/regress/expected/event_trigger.out | 106 +++++++++++++++++++ >> src/test/regress/sql/event_trigger.sql | 47 ++++++++ >> 4 files changed, 167 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > And I did drop a comment line I didn't mean to when trying things out, > so here's the update copy. There's a bug fix in there too, in both the > versions of the patch, that the new regression tests exercise.
I think these new regression tests are no good, because I doubt that the number of recursive calls that can fit into any given amount of stack space is guaranteed to be the same on all platforms. I have committed the bug fixes themselves, however. I wasn't entirely happy with your proposed documentation so I'm attaching a counter-proposal. My specific complaints are (1) telling people that event triggers are run in a savepoint seems a little too abstract; I have attempted to make the consequences more concrete; (2) RAISE EXCEPTION is PL/pgsql specific and not the only possible reason for an error; I have attempted to be more generic; and (3) in the process of fiddling with this, I noticed that the ddl_command_end documentation can, I believe, be made both shorter and more clear by turning it into a rider on the previous paragraph. Comments? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
event-trigger-docs.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
