| From: | Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Rules: A Modest Proposal |
| Date: | 2009-10-05 08:39:59 |
| Message-ID: | 9EC41A67CF601B05995A5B58@[172.26.14.62] |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
--On 5. Oktober 2009 09:51:29 +0300 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
wrote:
> The way forward with updatable views is triggers on views. I was going
> to write something about that in the future. I haven't worked out all
> the details.
In the mentioned discussion there was already the notion of "substitution
rules". The notion of this pretty much applies to something like "instead
of statement triggers". AFAIR, the discussion came up with a proposal for
some CURRENT OF-Syntax in rules, which creates some magic rule effectively
avoiding the self join and substitute the original query with the
WHERE-condition of the view appended.
--
Thanks
Bernd
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bernd Helmle | 2009-10-05 08:46:29 | Re: Rules: A Modest Proposal |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-10-05 08:22:17 | Re: Privileges and inheritance |