Re: conditional rule not applied

From: Seb <spluque(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: conditional rule not applied
Date: 2010-01-06 02:20:13
Message-ID: 87bph8otya.fsf@kolob.sebmags.homelinux.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 20:04:51 -0600,
Seb <spluque(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:39:15 -0600,
> Seb <spluque(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> CREATE RULE footwear_nothing_upd AS
>> ON UPDATE TO footwear DO INSTEAD NOTHING; CREATE RULE
>> footwear_newshoelaces_upd AS ON UPDATE TO footwear WHERE NEW.sl_name
>> <> OLD.sl_name AND OLD.sl_name IS NULL DO INSERT INTO shoelaces
>> (sh_id, sl_name) VALUES(NEW.sh_id, NEW.sl_name);

> I think my error is in the test expression, which doesn't deal
> properly with the null value, so correcting:

> CREATE RULE footwear_nothing_upd AS
> ON UPDATE TO footwear DO INSTEAD NOTHING;
> CREATE RULE footwear_newshoelaces_upd AS
> ON UPDATE TO footwear
> WHERE NEW.sl_name IS DISTINCT FROM OLD.sl_name AND OLD.sl_name IS NULL
> DO
> INSERT INTO shoelaces (sh_id, sl_name)
> VALUES(NEW.sh_id, NEW.sl_name);

> However, could a more direct and robust test for an inexistent record
> in 'shoelaces' be made?

Any ideas? I'm not sure this is the best way to test whether the record
to update corresponds to a inexistent record in 'shoelaces'. Thanks.

--
Seb

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tim Uckun 2010-01-06 02:30:03 Re: PostgreSQL Write Performance
Previous Message Craig Ringer 2010-01-06 01:15:07 Re: PostgreSQL Write Performance