| From: | "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jan Wieck" <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, "Steve Howe" <howe(at)carcass(dot)dhs(dot)org> |
| Cc: | "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue |
| Date: | 2002-09-09 15:48:09 |
| Message-ID: | 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA4961E79@m0114.s-mxs.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> could you please make a complete table of all
> possible situations and the expected returns? With complete I mean
> including all combinations of rules, triggers, deferred constraints and
> the like. Or do you at least see now where in the discussion we got
> stuck?
Imho only view rules (== instead rules) should affect the returned info.
Not "non instead" rules, triggers or constraints. Those are imho supposed to
be transparent as long as they don't abort the statement.
Especially for triggers and constraints there is no room for flexibility,
since other db's also don't modify the "affected rows" count for these.
Think sqlca.sqlerrd[2] /* number of rows processed */!
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-09-09 15:51:08 | Re: PREPARE code notes |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-09-09 15:46:50 | Re: Script to compute randon page cost |