Re: [GENERAL] INSTEAD rule bug?

Can we define the actual problem?
Does it have to do with NEW and OLD with UNIONS?
Or is it simply any conditional rule using UNION/EXCEPT/INTERSECT/...?

I ask because I'm confused by Tom's examples of failures.

Tom Lane wrote:

>Dmitry Tkach <dmitry(at)openratings(dot)com> writes:
>
>
>>Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Dmitry Tkach <dmitry(at)openratings(dot)com> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>>It would have saved a lot of trouble if it just complained about that
>>>>union thing right away and refuse to create the rule...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>That's what happens in CVS tip.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>I thought you said it was only complaining about references to new and
>>old, not about *any* union clause...
>>
>>
>
>I don't see a need to reject "any" union clause. AFAIK the cases that
>don't work are just the ones where NEW or OLD are referenced.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org
>
>