Re: UPDATE SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT ...) versus rules

From: Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)dalibo(dot)com>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: UPDATE SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT ...) versus rules
Date: 2014-06-17 09:22:17
Message-ID: 53A008C9.6090907@dalibo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 06/17/2014 09:43 AM, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> On 06/14/2014 09:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> > As I mentioned awhile ago, I'm thinking about implementing the
>> > SQL-standard construct
>> >
>> > UPDATE foo SET ..., (a,b,...) = (SELECT x,y,...), ...
>> >
>> > I've run into a rather nasty problem, which is how does this interact
>> > with expansion of NEW references in ON UPDATE rules?
>
> Was'nt there a plan (consensus?) about deprecating rules altogether ?

I believe that was just for user access to them, ie CREATE RULE. I
don't think there was ever question of purging them from the code base.
--
Vik

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Rowley 2014-06-17 09:27:14 Re: Window function optimisation, allow pushdowns of items matching PARTITION BY clauses
Previous Message xbzhang 2014-06-17 09:09:32 Re: How to implement the skip errors for copy from ?