Re: is it a bug in rule system?

From: laser <laserlist(at)pgsqldb(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: is it a bug in rule system?
Date: 2008-05-30 00:22:39
Message-ID: 483F48CF.8000509@pgsqldb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


>
> It's not a bug, just your misunderstanding of how rules work. Rules
> rewrite queries. What happen in your case is because of the condition
> your query will be split into two: once with your INSERT with a NOT
> EXISTS (subquery) and once as an UPDATE with the condition EXISTS
> (subquery).
>
> So the first query will insert with id=1 and then the update sees this
> row and updates it to 2.
>
> What this says is that rules are the wrong tool for what you're trying
> to do. Conditional rules are powerful but not appropriate here.
>
> Have a nice day,
>

Thanks to clarify, if it's a misunderstanding of rule, then I'll some how
confuse with DO INSTEAD vs. DO ALSO rule, isn't DO INSTEAD will
replace original INSERT with the one provided in CREATE RULE?
...after some rethinking, can I understand what happened as below step?

1, INSERT will be rewrite into a INSERT with a EXIST condition clause
and a UPDATE statement;
2, when NOT EXISTS, INSERT succeed, and the query tree in 1 proceed to
UPDATE;
3, the UPDATE saw the INSERT in 2, then UPDATE it;

if so, then I understand what happed there, and it's surly not a bug but
a mis-use of rule.

thanks and best regards

-laser

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Klint Gore 2008-05-30 03:22:26 Re: is it a bug in rule system?
Previous Message Chris Browne 2008-05-29 21:09:51 Re: New MS patent: sounds like PG db rules