On 17 October 2012 23:24, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote:
> I fact, I'll go further and say that I believe we will be deprecating
> RULEs eventually. It's merely a question of how long that will take and
> what we need to document, announce and implement before then.
>
> I would tend to say "well, they're not hurting anyone, why not keep
> them?" Except that we're gathering an increasing number of features
> (RETURNING, FDWs, CTEs, Command triggers) which don't work well together
> with RULEs. That puts us in danger of turning into MySQL ("Sorry, you
> can't use Full Text Search with transactions"), which is not a direction
> we want to go in.
I don't really understand. We *are* already in the position you say we
don't want to go towards. It's not a danger, its a current reality.
So what do we do? I've got the doc changes now. Let's agree the rest
of the plan...
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
