Re: Deprecating RULES

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Deprecating RULES
Date: 2012-10-15 13:12:25
Message-ID: 201210151512.25656.andres@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Monday, October 15, 2012 03:07:21 PM Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 15 October 2012 11:41, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 8:00 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> >> Please can anyone show me the SQL for a rule that cannot be written as
> >> a view or a trigger? I do not believe such a thing exists and I will
> >> provide free beer to the first person that can prove me wrong.
> >
> > Being written as a view doesn't help you because views use rules. I
> > repeat, the very fact that we need rules to implement views prove
> > rules are necessary for some purposes.
>
> No, it just means there is some aspect of similar underlying
> infrastructure.
>
> Denial of free beer looks like proof to me...

Well, didn't Tom already mention AFTER ... FOR EACH ROW triggers being
problematic because of the in-memory queue?

Greetings,

Andres
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2012-10-15 13:14:34 Re: Deprecating RULES
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2012-10-15 13:07:21 Re: Deprecating RULES