From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@postgresql.org>
Cc: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Fix documentation template for CREATE TRIGGER.
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 15:01:48 -0400
Message-ID: <20141011190148.GD21267@momjian.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1403464789.9081.11.camel@jeff-desktop>
References: <E1WyMAC-0005Fp-FO@gemulon.postgresql.org>
<1403464789.9081.11.camel@jeff-desktop>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-committers>
Did we ever address this concern?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 12:19:49PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-06-21 at 14:21 +0000, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> > Fix documentation template for CREATE TRIGGER.
> >
> > By using curly braces, the template had specified that one of
> > "NOT DEFERRABLE", "INITIALLY IMMEDIATE", or "INITIALLY DEFERRED"
> > was required on any CREATE TRIGGER statement, which is not
> > accurate. Change to square brackets makes that optional.
> >
> > Backpatch to 9.1, where the error was introduced.
>
> It still doesn't look quite right to me. The new form:
>
> [ NOT DEFERRABLE | [ DEFERRABLE ] { INITIALLY IMMEDIATE | INITIALLY
> DEFERRED } ]
>
> says that, if DEFERRABLE is specified, then INITIALLY IMMEDIATE or
> INITIALLY DEFERRED is required. But the following is accepted by the
> server:
>
> create constraint trigger mytrigger
> after insert on dummy_table deferrable
> for each row execute procedure dummy_trigger();
>
> (Although the standard doesn't seem to have deferrable triggers, that
> does seem to match the deferrable constraint syntax that is in the
> spec.)
>
> For that matter, the following is also accepted by the server:
>
> create constraint trigger mytrigger
> after insert on dummy_table initially deferred deferrable
> for each row execute procedure dummy_trigger();
>
> That case may be a bug; and regardless I don't think we want to
> document/encourage specifying them in that order. But the first case
> seems reasonable to me.
>
> Regards,
> Jeff Davis
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list (pgsql-committers@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-committers
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
--
Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list (pgsql-committers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-committers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org
Cc: bruce@momjian.us, pgsql@j-davis.com, kgrittn@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Fix documentation template for CREATE TRIGGER.
In-Reply-To: <20141011190148.GD21267@momjian.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox