Re: Listing triggers in partitions (was Re: Remove mention in docsthat foreign keys on partitioned tables) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Langote
Subject Re: Listing triggers in partitions (was Re: Remove mention in docsthat foreign keys on partitioned tables)
Date
Msg-id 68116cdb-8cde-31d5-5fff-181a5ae49495@lab.ntt.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Listing triggers in partitions (was Re: Remove mention in docsthat foreign keys on partitioned tables)  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Listing triggers in partitions (was Re: Remove mention in docsthat foreign keys on partitioned tables)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2018/06/29 6:23, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 6/28/18 22:52, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> Couldn't psql chase the pg_depend links to find inherited triggers?
>>
>> Yeah, I thought this would be exceedingly ugly, but apparently it's not
>> *that* bad -- see the attached patch, which relies on the fact that
>> triggers don't otherwise depend on other triggers.  We don't use this
>> technique elsewhere in psql though.
> 
> Yeah, relying on pg_depend to detect relationships between catalog
> objects is a bit evil.  We do use this for detecting sequences linked to
> tables, which also has its share of problems.  Ideally, there would be a
> column in pg_trigger, perhaps, that makes this link explicit.  But we
> are looking here for a solution without catalog changes, I believe.

+1 if that gets the job done.

Thanks,
Amit



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Haribabu Kommi
Date:
Subject: Re: Does logical replication supports cross platform servers?
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: SCRAM with channel binding downgrade attack