From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
cc: petermpallesen@gmail.com, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Not using suppress_redundant_updates_trigger in
 sql-createtrigger.html#examples
In-reply-to: <20200616164108.GA12171@momjian.us>
References: <159195294959.673.5752624528747900508@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
 <20200616103644.GE31175@momjian.us> <1300920.1592316494@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20200616164108.GA12171@momjian.us>
Comments: In-reply-to Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
	message dated "Tue, 16 Jun 2020 12:41:08 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1369889.1592329185.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 13:39:45 -0400
Message-ID: <1369890.1592329185@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> I have developed the attached patch which is in a better direction.

I still wish you wouldn't jam this topic into an only-marginally-related
sentence.  In the case at hand, the point that the existing text is
making is that a no-op update will fire triggers.  Which is not
something that suppress_redundant_updates_trigger will suppress,
so again it seems confusing to mention that in the same breath.

I think that perhaps the right thing to do is add a new para to
CREATE TRIGGER's "Notes" section, along the lines of

       There are a few built-in trigger functions that can be used
       to solve common problems without having to write your own trigger
       code.  See Section 9.28.

This would have the advantage of covering the other built-in triggers
not only suppress_redundant_updates_trigger.

			regards, tom lane