Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Updateable views...

From: Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>
To: Eric D Nielsen <nielsene(at)MIT(dot)EDU>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>,PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Updateable views...
Date: 2003-03-05 16:12:01
Message-ID: 1046880721.19527.10.camel@jester (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 10:39, Eric D Nielsen wrote:
> > Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> > > I haven't had time to look into it further, but it occurs to me that
> > > handling views which rely on joins would be far from trivial.
> > 
> > Views containing joins would not be updatable; problem solved. 
> I see how that is what the spec says, but aren't the majority of joins that
> people use/want to update a join of some type?  I thought that SQL99 allowed
> updating view created by joins.
> In either case is this a place where "exceeding" the spec would be a good 
> thing or a bad thing?

Lets try to meet the spec first, then debate about whether extending it
is a good or bad thing :)

Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>

PGP Key:

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Curt SampsonDate: 2003-03-05 16:29:45
Subject: Re: Updateable views...
Previous:From: Rod TaylorDate: 2003-03-05 16:07:04
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Non-colliding auto generated names

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group