Re: how to find out whether a view is updatable

From: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: how to find out whether a view is updatable
Date: 2013-06-13 05:37:58
Message-ID: CAEZATCX7bpH=G8PRz92CbDOwQgzsXDMTe5JHb-eTB_Y9=zcHjg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12 June 2013 23:01, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> [ pg_relation_is_updatable.patch ]
>
> I've committed this with some modifications as mentioned. There is
> still room to debate exactly what
> information_schema.columns.is_updatable means --- we can now change that
> without an initdb.
>

Thanks. Those modifications all look pretty neat.

I'm inclined to stick with the current definition of what updatable
means in the information schema. I'm not entirely convinced that other
possible interpretations of the spec are any more valid, and it
certainly doesn't seem worth another initdb or a break with backwards
compatibility by changing it. At least we now have functions that can
give a more intuitive result for updatability.

Regards,
Dean

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dean Rasheed 2013-06-13 06:59:05 Re: [9.3] Automatically updatable views vs writable foreign tables
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2013-06-13 03:16:48 [PATCH] Remove useless USE_PGXS support in contrib