Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Ants Aasma <ants.aasma@eesti.ee> wrote:
> > On Jul 21, 2013 4:06 AM, "Noah Misch" <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
> >> If these hooks will need to apply to a larger operation, I
> >> think that mandates a different means to reliably expose the before/after
> >> object states.
> >
> > I haven't checked the code to see how it would fit the API, but what about
> > taking a snapshot before altering and passing this to the hook. Would there
> > be other issues besides performance? If the snapshot is taken only when
> > there is a hook present then the performance can be fixed later.
>
> I had the idea of finding a way to pass either the old tuple, or
> perhaps just the TID of the old tuple. Not sure if passing a snapshot
> is better.
It seems this issue was forgotten. Any takers?
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
