From: | Steve Howe <howe(at)carcass(dot)dhs(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue |
Date: | 2002-09-10 03:25:48 |
Message-ID: | 7171134999.20020910002548@carcass.dhs.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello Bruce,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 11:13:20 PM, you wrote:
BM> Steve Howe wrote:
>> Because the affected commands are supposed to give you back
>> information on what your INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE commands, not what is
>> making behind the scenes.
>>
>> And it seems that other people in the thread agree with me, please
>> read thread.
>>
>> Since you are probably very familiar with the rules system, why don't
>> you vote on a proposal too, or just suggest yours. Your opinion is
>> very important. I'm not saying I'm the truth owner; I'm just another
>> developer who needs a feature working again.
BM> Jan actually did vote in the first round which appears in TODO.detail.
BM> He voted that if the INSTEAD rule had only _one_ statement, return that,
BM> if not, return nothing.
We still need Tom's word and Hiroshi, since they were the most related
to the subject, and the other developer's opinion... :)
-------------
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:howe(at)carcass(dot)dhs(dot)org
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Steve Howe | 2002-09-10 03:26:49 | Re: Proposal: Solving the "Return proper affected tuple |
Previous Message | Sean Chittenden | 2002-09-10 03:18:38 | Re: Optimization levels when compiling PostgreSQL... |