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: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue |
Date: | 2002-09-10 07:11:35 |
Message-ID: | 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA4961E7B@m0114.s-mxs.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> What is the difference
> between a trigger, a rule and an instead rule from a business process
> oriented point of view? I think there is none at all. They are just
> different techniques to do one and the same, implement
> business logic in the database system.
The difference is how other db's work. They all ignore triggers and constraints
in the sqlca.sqlerrd[2] "number of processed rows" count, that I see identical to our
affected rows count. They all have views, but not many have rules :-) Pg's "instead rules"
are the toolkit for views, and as such need special handling, imho.
Andreas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Karel Zak | 2002-09-10 07:27:05 | Re: PREPARE code notes |
Previous Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD | 2002-09-10 07:00:52 | Re: Proposal: Solving the "Return proper effected tuple |