| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com |
| Cc: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, "A(dot)M(dot)" <agentm(at)themactionfaction(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: sql DO in rule 9.0rc1 |
| Date: | 2010-09-10 18:18:10 |
| Message-ID: | 27585.1284142690@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, 2010-09-10 at 13:39 -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> IDK...functions do everything 'DO' does, and support returning data,
>> which is necessary to support RETURNING. Rules are already fairly
>> capricious and problematic and I doubt any proposal that doesn't fix
>> or work around their basic flaws will get much traction.
> Not to mention there have been talks of ripping them out all together.
Yeah. Proposals to add inessential features to rules are probably not
going to go far at the moment. What we need first is a design for fixing
their fundamental issues, so that we can have some reason to think
we're not going to just give up and rip 'em out :-(
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Fetter | 2010-09-10 19:04:30 | Re: Frustration with \copy |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-09-10 18:14:09 | Re: Frustration with \copy |