Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Ants Aasma wrote:
> > On Jul 21, 2013 4:06 AM, "Noah Misch" wrote:
> >> If these hooks will need to apply to a larger operation, I
> >> think that mandates a different means to reliably expose the before/after
> >> object states.
> >
> > I hav
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Ants Aasma wrote:
> On Jul 21, 2013 4:06 AM, "Noah Misch" wrote:
>> If these hooks will need to apply to a larger operation, I
>> think that mandates a different means to reliably expose the before/after
>> object states.
>
> I haven't checked the code to see how
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 11:44:51AM +0300, Ants Aasma wrote:
> On Jul 21, 2013 4:06 AM, "Noah Misch" wrote:
> > If these hooks will need to apply to a larger operation, I
> > think that mandates a different means to reliably expose the before/after
> > object states.
>
> I haven't checked the code
On Jul 21, 2013 4:06 AM, "Noah Misch" wrote:
> If these hooks will need to apply to a larger operation, I
> think that mandates a different means to reliably expose the before/after
> object states.
I haven't checked the code to see how it would fit the API, but what about
taking a snapshot befor
objectaccess.h has this to say:
* OAT_POST_ALTER should be invoked just after the object is altered,
* but before the command counter is incremented. An extension using the
* hook can use SnapshotNow and SnapshotSelf to get the old and new
* versions of the tuple.
That's a clever design, but
