| From: | "Zeugswetter Andreas DAZ SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, "Jan Wieck" <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: DO INSTEAD and conditional rules |
| Date: | 2005-04-28 05:45:46 |
| Message-ID: | E1539E0ED7043848906A8FF995BDA5790C514D@m0143.s-mxs.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > If we did not define
> > it that way, I think your example would have to error out --- how
> > would you choose which INSTEAD rule wins?
>
> The documentation says that they evaluate in alphabetical order by
> name. So I would expect that the first one to have its WHERE statement
> evaluate to true would short-circuit the execution of the remaining
> rules.
Why not simply write non overlapping WHERE statements ?
Imho not doing them all would be very counter intuitive.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2005-04-28 05:48:42 | Re: [HACKERS] Increased company involvement |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-04-28 05:30:30 | Re: Increased company involvement |