Re: RETURNING and DO INSTEAD ... Intentional or not?

From: "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: RETURNING and DO INSTEAD ... Intentional or not?
Date: 2007-09-14 20:06:39
Message-ID: 162867790709141306l7750f957m290a3e925f89a5c7@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Would it make sense to expand this to something like:
>
> Make it possible for rules to return affected tuples?
>
> I come to this because if you use a rule to create an updateable view,
> you never know how many rows the view actually updated.
>

Updatable views can be (maybe) implemented with updatable cursors.

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-06/msg00335.php

Regards
Pavel Stehule

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2007-09-14 21:12:36 Re: Use of global and static variables in shared libraries
Previous Message Hannes Eder 2007-09-14 20:01:12 Re: MSVC build system