Re: Re: [SQL] Rules with Conditions: Bug, or Misunderstanding

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: mhh(at)mindspring(dot)com
Cc: "Joel Burton" <jburton(at)scw(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Re: [SQL] Rules with Conditions: Bug, or Misunderstanding
Date: 2000-12-02 05:18:39
Message-ID: 16036.975734319@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql

Mark Hollomon <mhh(at)mindspring(dot)com> writes:
> I think it would be better to move the test further down, to just before we
> actually try to do the update/insert. Maybe into the heap access routines as
> suggested by Andreas.

I'm worried about whether it'll be practical to generate a good error
message from that low a level.

Looking at it from the DBA's viewpoint rather than implementation
details, I haven't seen a good reason *why* we should support
conditional rules for views, as opposed to an unconditional rule with
multiple actions. Seems to me that writing independent rules that you
hope will cover all cases is a great way to build an unreliable system.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2000-12-02 16:42:38 Re: beta testing version
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-12-02 05:11:23 Re: ALTER FUNCTION problem

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Roberto Mello 2000-12-02 06:09:04 Re: I can be a BUG?
Previous Message Ross J. Reedstrom 2000-12-02 03:27:06 Re: I can be a BUG?