Re: orderRules() now a bad idea?

Tom Lane wrote:
> I just noticed that rewriteHandler.c contains a subroutine orderRules()
> that reorders the rules for a relation into the order
> non-instead rules
> qualified instead rules
> unqualified instead rules
> This conflicts with the feature we'd added to 7.3 to fire rules in
> alphabetical order. (What will presently happen is they'll be fired
> alphabetically in each of these categories.)
>
> I see that the logic in fireRules() assumes that rules are processed in
> this order, but that would be fairly easy to fix. Is there any other
> good reason for doing this reordering? I'd like to remove orderRules()
> and implement straight alphabetical ordering.

Unless Jan has an objection, I think alpha is best, because it matches
trigger rule odering. That original rule ordering isn't something
anyone is going to figure out on their own.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073