| From: | Dmitry Tkach <dmitry(at)openratings(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] INSTEAD rule bug? |
| Date: | 2003-07-15 17:00:47 |
| Message-ID: | 3F14333F.1070409@openratings.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-general |
Tom Lane wrote:
>Oh, I see what you're on about. Sorry, a "DO INSTEAD NOTHING" only
>suppresses the original command, it does not suppress other rules.
>I think what you want is to make the insert_test rule conditional
>on x being not null.
>
>
>
Yeah... that's what I was afraid of :-(
The problem is that in the 'real life' situation the condition is a lot
more complicated than this simple is null test... I hate having to
duplicate it, and I hate even more having to evaluate it twice on every
insert :-(
Dima
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-07-15 17:30:54 | Re: [GENERAL] INSTEAD rule bug? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-07-15 16:53:34 | Re: [GENERAL] INSTEAD rule bug? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-07-15 17:30:54 | Re: [GENERAL] INSTEAD rule bug? |
| Previous Message | Steve Crawford | 2003-07-15 16:58:08 | Re: Are you frustrated with PostgreSQL |