Re: The suppress_redundant_updates_trigger() works incorrectly

Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>   
>> This method is utterly, utterly unacceptable; you're probably trashing
>> the contents of a disk buffer there.
>>     
>
> ... however, it seems reasonable to assume that the *new* tuple is just
> local storage.  Why don't you just poke the old tuple's OID into the new
> one before comparing?
>
>             
>   

OK, that will be easy enough. I assume I should still put InvalidOid 
back again afterwards, in case someone downstream relies on it.

cheers

andrew