| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Deprecating RULES |
| Date: | 2012-10-15 13:12:25 |
| Message-ID: | 201210151512.25656.andres@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Monday, October 15, 2012 03:07:21 PM Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 15 October 2012 11:41, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 8:00 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> >> Please can anyone show me the SQL for a rule that cannot be written as
> >> a view or a trigger? I do not believe such a thing exists and I will
> >> provide free beer to the first person that can prove me wrong.
> >
> > Being written as a view doesn't help you because views use rules. I
> > repeat, the very fact that we need rules to implement views prove
> > rules are necessary for some purposes.
>
> No, it just means there is some aspect of similar underlying
> infrastructure.
>
> Denial of free beer looks like proof to me...
Well, didn't Tom already mention AFTER ... FOR EACH ROW triggers being
problematic because of the in-memory queue?
Greetings,
Andres
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2012-10-15 13:14:34 | Re: Deprecating RULES |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-10-15 13:07:21 | Re: Deprecating RULES |