| From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, Steve Howe <howe(at)carcass(dot)dhs(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue |
| Date: | 2002-09-10 02:18:07 |
| Message-ID: | 20020909191701.E19426-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Jan Wieck wrote:
> > We should surely keep this on a much more technical level and avoid any
> > personal offendings. To do so, please explain to me why you think that
> > triggers and constraints are out of focus here? What is the difference
> > between a trigger, a rule and an instead rule from a business process
> > oriented point of view? I think there is none at all. They are just
> > different techniques to do one and the same, implement business logic in
> > the database system.
>
> All the problems here are coming from INSTEAD rules. We don't have
> INSTEAD triggers or contraints.
Sure we do, well sort of. :)
Make a before trigger that does a different statement and returns NULL
to abort the original action on that row.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rod Taylor | 2002-09-10 02:20:31 | Re: Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-09-10 02:17:22 | Re: 7.3beta and ecpg |