Re: a dumb question regarding RULES

On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 16:48 +0200, hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 04:06:34PM +0200, Rafal Pietrak wrote:
> > Hi all,
>
> first of all - why did you send this mail as reply to some 2-weeks old
> thread, instead of just start of new thread?

Sorry for that. Old habits... always forget that.

>
> > Can someone give a little explenation here ... or point me to "for
> > dummies" documentation? (yes, I've been though postgres docs, to no
> > avail).
>
> perhaps this will help:
>
> http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/06/15/to-rule-or-not-to-rule-that-is-the-question/
>

Hmmm. not really. Yet, more puzzles are there, so may be they'll guide
me to the answer, eventualy.

One thing I've spotted there, is that earlier I've naively assumed, that
when I define a RULE INSTEAD, the original query is "discarded" on the
final rewritten query. The example found at your link shows that it
isn't ... which is *extremally* strange, but somehow explains what I get
in my set of rules "supposedly" exclusive.

... or may be this "theory" is also wrong :(

Anyway, thenx for the link.

-R