From: | Brook Milligan <brook(at)biology(dot)nmsu(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | kyle(at)actarg(dot)com |
Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: question on update/delete rules on views |
Date: | 2000-05-17 21:01:35 |
Message-ID: | 200005172101.PAA21328@biology.nmsu.edu |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
BTW, do you have an equally sensible explanation of how the "where condition"
that is part of the rule syntax differs from the where clause that comes after
the "do instead"?
I don't know what you mean by these two different where conditions.
To my understanding the only instance of a where condition in the rule
is in the "do" part. Think of triggering the "do" part individually
for each view tuple to be updated. If you wish to act on a table, you
must identify how the parts of the current tuple identify a tuple or
tuples in the target table. That is the sole role of the "where"
condition in the "do" part of the rule.
Cheers,
Brook
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-05-17 21:47:13 | Re: question on update/delete rules on views |
Previous Message | Kyle Bateman | 2000-05-17 20:47:02 | Re: question on update/delete rules on views |