Re: minimal update

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> 
> 
> Kenneth Marshall wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 06:05:26PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>  
>>> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
>>>    
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>>>>        
>>>>>> "Minimal" really fails to convey the point here IMHO.  How about
>>>>>> something like "suppress_no_op_updates_trigger"?
>>>>>>           
>>>> I think it means something to us, but "no op" is a very technical
>>>> phrase
>>>> that probably doesn't travel very well.
>>>>       
>>> Agreed --- I was hoping someone could improve on that part.  The only
>>> other words I could come up with were "empty" and "useless", neither of
>>> which seem quite le mot juste ...
>>>
>>>             regards, tom lane
>>>
>>>     
>> redundant?
>>
>>
>>   
> 
> I think I like this best of all the suggestions -
> suppress_redundant_updates_trigger() is what I have now.
> 
> If there's no further discussion, I'll go ahead and commit this in a day
> or two.

Nitpicking, but you have:
+    <para>
+       Currently <productname>PostgreSQL</> provides one built in trigger
+       function, <function>suppress_redundant_updates_trigger</>,


Should we perhaps mention the fulltext triggers (with the appropriate
links) here? If it's intended to be an authoritative list of the
"userspace" triggers we ship, I think that may be a good idea.


//Magnus