From: | Jaime Casanova <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: rewriter in updateable views |
Date: | 2005-03-19 17:26:24 |
Message-ID: | c2d9e70e0503190926201f0267@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 11:05:39 -0500, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Jaime Casanova <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 23:31:26 -0500, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Why do you not define the problem as "when we decide a view is
> >> updateable and create the needed rules for it, also create default
> >> values for it by copying up from the base tables"?
> >>
> > Well, that was our first thought. but what if the default value is
> > changed in the base table?
>
> So? Being able to have a different default for the view could be
> construed as a feature, not a bug.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
We are not against this. As you say this is a feature, but if the view
doesn't have a default value we have to assign something in the
appropiate col in the insert.
ALTER TABLE view_name ALTER COLUMN ADD/DROP DEFAULT is your friend ;)
regards,
Jaime Casanova
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-03-19 17:57:45 | GUC variable for setting number of local buffers |
Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2005-03-19 17:23:33 | Re: rewriter in updateable views |