From: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Najib Abi Fadel <nabifadel(at)usj(dot)edu(dot)lb> |
Cc: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, generalpost <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Multiple Rules :: Postgres Is confused !! |
Date: | 2004-09-29 12:19:08 |
Message-ID: | 20040929121908.GE5152@svana.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> > Because that's what you asked upd1/2 to do for you. To see what is
> > happening, try selecting row id=53597 then manually running each rule
> > yourself, substituting in the OLD.foo from your selected row. You should
> > find that there are two rows that match 53597 on (cursus_id, vers_id,
> > traiter, code_type_academic) - itself and one other.
>
> Sorry, I didn't understand the manuel test procedure
>
> What is happening here? I am doing an update and the condition is on the ID
> and it is corresponding to the last Rule so why should the other rules
> interfer.
Here you misunderstand. You've got an UPDATE on that table set to
trigger a RULE. *All* the rules. Postgresql is not just going to pick
one based on what it thinks you might mean. Since you've got 3 rules
for UPDATE on that table, I imagine all three rules are getting fired.
With DO INSTEAD I expect either the first one or the last one to win, I
don't know enough about the specifics.
Hope this helps,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> Patent. n. Genius is 5% inspiration and 95% perspiration. A patent is a
> tool for doing 5% of the work and then sitting around waiting for someone
> else to do the other 95% so you can sue them.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2004-09-29 12:20:02 | Re: Multiple Rules :: Postgres Is confused !! |
Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2004-09-29 11:43:11 | Re: About PostgreSQL's limit on arithmetic operations |