Re: Proposal: Solving the "Return proper effected tuple count from complex commands [return]" issue

Hello Peter,

Monday, September 9, 2002, 3:41:41 PM, you wrote:

PE> Steve Howe writes:

>> Here are the proposals for solutioning the "Return proper effected
>> tuple count from complex commands [return]" issue as seen on TODO.
>>
>> Any comments ?... This is obviously open to voting and discussion.

PE> We don't have a whole lot of freedom in this; this area is covered by the
PE> SQL standard. The major premise in the standard's point of view is that
PE> views are supposed to be transparent. That is, if

PE> SELECT * FROM my_view WHERE condition;

PE> return N rows, then a subsequently executed

PE> UPDATE my_view SET ... WHERE condition;

PE> returns an update count of N, no matter what happens behind the scenes. I
PE> don't think this matches Tom Lane's view exactly, but it's a lot closer
PE> than your proposal.
If there was a single statement per rules executed, this would be end
of discussion... but as you know there can be possible multiple
statements per rules, and the difficulty is what do to in those
cases.

As far as of now, Tom Lane's proposal seems to be the most accepted,
without using a new API.

-------------
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:howe(at)carcass(dot)dhs(dot)org