Re: UPDATE SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT ...) versus rules
| От | Hannu Krosing |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: UPDATE SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT ...) versus rules |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 53A036D0.5090100@2ndQuadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: UPDATE SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT ...) versus rules (Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@dalibo.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 06/17/2014 11:22 AM, Vik Fearing wrote: > On 06/17/2014 09:43 AM, Hannu Krosing wrote: >> On 06/14/2014 09:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>>> As I mentioned awhile ago, I'm thinking about implementing the >>>> SQL-standard construct >>>> >>>> UPDATE foo SET ..., (a,b,...) = (SELECT x,y,...), ... >>>> >>>> I've run into a rather nasty problem, which is how does this interact >>>> with expansion of NEW references in ON UPDATE rules? >> Was'nt there a plan (consensus?) about deprecating rules altogether ? > I believe that was just for user access to them, ie CREATE RULE. I > don't think there was ever question of purging them from the code base. But are there any cases, where UPDATE rules are created behind the scenes ? -- Hannu Krosing PostgreSQL Consultant Performance, Scalability and High Availability 2ndQuadrant Nordic OÜ
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: