Re: [PATCH] Add pg_get_trigger_ddl() to retrieve the CREATE TRIGGER statement
| От | Philip Alger |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [PATCH] Add pg_get_trigger_ddl() to retrieve the CREATE TRIGGER statement |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAPXBC8JV54wejhNAhgSPLgupVkpfpQPwGkjuuY-17GF12S_+-w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Add pg_get_trigger_ddl() to retrieve the CREATE TRIGGER statement (Jim Jones <jim.jones@uni-muenster.de>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Add pg_get_trigger_ddl() to retrieve the CREATE TRIGGER statement
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Jim,
I am now wondering if introducing these new set of parameters to
pg_get_triggerdef() would be a better solution that creating a new
function.
Doing so we keep it consistent with the other pg_get*def functions. What
do you think?
The rationale behind it is here: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/945db7c5-be75-45bf-b55b-cb1e56f2e3e9%40dunslane.net
So, I am new to PG development, but I am hesitant to modify the existing `pg_get_triggerdef` or its parameters. My concern is that users may currently rely on its existing functionality and parameter structure, and altering it could introduce breaking changes. I think the naming `pg_get_trigger_ddl` is actually better than `triggerdef` because all the current `pg_get*def` implementations accept OIDs. To my knowledge, the only one that accepted an OIDs or a name is `pg_get_viewdef`, but the name variant is now deprecated.
Best,
Phil Alger
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: