Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([87.238.57.229])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <bruce@momjian.us>) id 1T1UEx-0003fo-Tg
	for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 03:25:51 +0000
Received: from momjian.us ([72.94.173.45])
	by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <bruce@momjian.us>) id 1T1UEv-0003V4-Tt
	for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 03:25:51 +0000
Received: from bruce by momjian.us with local (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <bruce@momjian.us>)
	id 1T1UEv-0008Bl-D6; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 23:25:49 -0400
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 23:25:49 -0400
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
 pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: lo_manage trigger on updates
Message-ID: <20120815032549.GD25473@momjian.us>
References: 
 <CAK3UJRHaEuzfnZaxarcV8=RP1sC5xLxumzqx6iiyqpJVS89rjw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmoZQEbFFRR9X25azdBMpWcYx6RDncTODF0hOcR9GYRz0dw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAK3UJREFBuXJfb3OqUyU+Q_Rm82Xnjyxf7_wJqzQgu+ozDBAoQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAK3UJREFBuXJfb3OqUyU+Q_Rm82Xnjyxf7_wJqzQgu+ozDBAoQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-)
X-Archive-Number: 201208/19
X-Sequence-Number: 7412

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 08:08:32PM -0400, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 11:43 PM, Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I think the doc section about using lo_manage() as a trigger:
> >>   http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/lo.html
> >>
> >> could have its example tweaked to use a column-level BEFORE UPDATE
> >> trigger, so as to save unnecessary trigger firings. Something like the
> >> attached, perhaps?
> >
> > Uh, wow.  That syntax is horribly surprising, isn't it?  My eyes want
> > to parse it as:
> >
> > BEFORE (UPDATE OF raster) OR (DELETE ON image)
> >
> > ...which is totally wrong.
> 
> Yeah, the syntax we have is really confusing. I notice this tidbit on that page:
> 
> | The ability to specify multiple actions for a single trigger using OR
> | is a PostgreSQL extension of the SQL standard.
> 
> Maybe the folks dreaming up the SQL standard are sharper than they get
> credit for.
> 
> > I'm inclined to think that maybe we should leave that example as-is,
> > and maybe add the variant you're proposing as a second example,
> > showing how the basic version can be refined.
> 
> The nice thing about keeping the example the way it is, is that it's
> pretty simple to understand, and maybe adding the second slightly more
> complicated example would just confuse things. We could just add in a
> blurb like this at the end of "How to Use It":
> 
>    You may wish to restrict the trigger
>     to only fire upon UPDATEs of the <type>lo</> column(s) in the table by
>     specifying the column name via BEFORE UPDATE OF
>     <replaceable class="parameter">column_name</replaceable>.

I think I like that idea so I used your text instead of the full
new example.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +