I see what you mean - yes - corrections to post below:
> On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Barbara Lindsey wrote:
>
>> CREATE SEQUENCE "prod_id_seq" cache 1;
>> CREATE TABLE "prod_data" (
>> "prod_id" integer DEFAULT nextval('prod_id_seq') PRIMARY KEY,
>> "client_id" integer NOT NULL,
>> "cat_id" integer NOT NULL,
>> "status_id" integer NOT NULL,
>> "modified" timestamp with time zone DEFAULT
>> current_timestamp, "modified_by" varchar(50) DEFAULT
>> current_user,
>> CONSTRAINT prod_clnt_fk FOREIGN KEY (client_id)
>> REFERENCES ref_clients(client_id)
>> ON DELETE CASCADE ON UPDATE CASCADE,
>> CONSTRAINT prod_cat_fk FOREIGN KEY (cat_id)
>> REFERENCES ref_category(cat_id)
>> ON DELETE CASCADE ON UPDATE CASCADE,
>> CONSTRAINT prod_stat_fk FOREIGN KEY (status_id)
>> REFERENCES ref_status(status_id)
>> ON DELETE CASCADE ON UPDATE CASCADE
>> );
>>
>> TABLE prod_data_bak looks just like prod_data but with all constraints
>> removed.
>>
>>
>> Here is where the problem begins. When I try to create this rule:
>>
>> CREATE RULE log_prod_upd AS ON UPDATE TO prod_data
>> where NEW.prod_id = OLD.prod_id
>> DO INSERT INTO prod_data_bak VALUES (
>> OLD.prod_id,OLD.client_id,
>> OLD.cat_id, OLD.status_id,
>> OLD.modified,OLD.modified_by
>> );
>
> Was this intended to go to prod_data_bak as opposed to job_data_bak?
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly