Re: Rules: A Modest Proposal

2009/10/4 David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>:
> On Sun, Oct 04, 2009 at 08:48:15PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> 2009/10/4 David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>:
>> > Folks,
>> >
>> > At the moment, user-accessible RULEs have, as far as I know, just two
>> > sane uses:
>> >
>> > * Writing to VIEWs
>> > * Routing writes to partitions
>>
>> somebody use it as instead triggers.
>
> Some people also shoot themselves in the foot.  They're mostly a
> foot-gun.

it same as inheritance. BEFORE triggers should be a problem to (in some cases)

>
>> And I am sure, so there are people, who use it for writable views.
>
> That *is* the first case I mentioned.  Your point is?

sorry updateable views, is correct name. I know, so rules are
dangerous gun, but I know so there are people, who use it. And
actually we don't have a substitutions. I thing so if pg drop a rules.
then it needs true updateable views and instead triggers. And maybe
some as audit tools. When you would to to drop some functionality,
then you have to propose a substitution.

Pavel
>
> Cheers,
> David.
> --
> David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
> Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
> Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
>
> Remember to vote!
> Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
>