From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: RETURNING and DO INSTEAD ... Intentional or not? |
Date: | 2007-09-13 20:02:35 |
Message-ID: | 200709131302.35367.josh@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
All,
> I'll note that we currently prevent adding RETURNING to a *conditional* DO
> INSTEAD rule. This means that if we have a conditional DO INSTEAD rule
> which inserts into a different table than the final unconditional rule,
> we'll be RETURNING wrong or empty values. Mind you, that's a pretty
> extreme corner case.
FYI, after some tinkering around, I've found that RETURNING is 100%
incompatible with any table which has conditional DO INSTEAD rules; there's
just no way to make it work and return any intelligible data. This would be
a completely corner case, except that people use conditional DO INSTEAD rules
heavily with partitioning (and yes, real users are complaining).
I don't see this as super-urgent to fix for 8.3, but can we put it up as a
TODO?
-- Make it possible to use RETURNING together with conditional DO INSTEAD
rules, such as for partitioning setups.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-09-13 21:46:26 | Another HOT thought: why do we need indcreatexid at all? |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-09-13 19:15:01 | Re: Problem |