Re: What about improving the rules system we have, was Re: Rules going away

From: Harald Fuchs <hari(dot)fuchs(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: What about improving the rules system we have, was Re: Rules going away
Date: 2011-09-28 16:46:02
Message-ID: 86aa9olinp.fsf@protecting.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

In article <4116(dot)1317226367(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

> Not sure this specific proposal makes any sense at all. IMO the only
> real advantage that rules have over triggers is that they work on a
> set-operation basis not a tuple-by-tuple basis.

Isn't that what statement-level triggers are for, at least in other DB
systems? How about telling PostgreSQL's statement-level triggers
something about the set of rows they affect?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Merlin Moncure 2011-09-28 17:01:03 Re: What about improving the rules system we have, was Re: Rules going away
Previous Message Diego Augusto Molina 2011-09-28 16:45:11 Re: [Solved] Generic logging system for pre-hstore using plperl triggers