On Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 12:30:44AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> tomas(at)fabula(dot)de writes:
> > My pattern of use for ``CREATE RULE... NOTIFY...'' was [...]

> Yeah, that is the normal and recommended usage pattern for NOTIFY, so
> getting a NOTIFY when nothing actually happened is fairly harmless.
> (Undoubtedly that's why no one complained before.)
> 
> Changing the rewriter to error out when it couldn't really Do The Right
> Thing seemed like a good idea at the time, but now it seems clear that
> this didn't do anything to enhance the usefulness of the system.  Unless
> someone objects, I'll change it back for 7.2.
> 
> 			regards, tom lane

I won't object ;-)

Thank you again
-- tomas

In response to

• Re: Conditional NOTIFY is not implemented at 2001-09-07 04:30:44 from Tom Lane

Responses

• Re: Conditional NOTIFY is not implemented at 2001-09-07 14:40:53 from matthew.copeland

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2001-09-07 14:37:28
	Subject: Re: backend hba.c prob
Previous:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2001-09-07 14:30:02
	Subject: Re: Beta Monday?

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:	From: matthew.copeland	Date: 2001-09-07 14:40:53
	Subject: Re: Conditional NOTIFY is not implemented
Previous:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2001-09-07 14:18:05
	Subject: Re: parse error: LIMIT combined with UNION