From: | <matthew(dot)copeland(at)honeywell(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | <tomas(at)fabula(dot)de> |
Cc: | <pgsql-bugs(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Conditional NOTIFY is not implemented |
Date: | 2001-09-07 14:40:53 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0109070939150.5951-100000@testgs.gaa.aro.allied.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 7 Sep 2001 tomas(at)fabula(dot)de wrote:
> 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
I wouldn't really mind that either. My employer wouldn't allow me to
change the current set of RULE/NOTIFY's to triggers so that we could
upgrade to 7.1.3 from 7.0.3, so having it act the same way in 7.2 as it
did in 7.0.3 would be nice for me. :)
Matthew M. Copeland
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2001-09-07 15:01:46 | pgsql/src/backend/utils/mb encnames.c |
Previous Message | tomas | 2001-09-07 14:33:33 | Re: Conditional NOTIFY is not implemented |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeroen van Vianen | 2001-09-07 14:45:57 | Re: [HACKERS] JDBC pg_description update needed for CVS |
Previous Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2001-09-07 14:40:45 | Re: Beta Monday? |