> That's a pretty neat one-liner. However... in my view, the real cost > of rules is that they are hard to support as we add new features to > SQL. I believe we already decided to punt on making them work with > CTEs... and maybe one other case? I don't really remember the details > any more, but presumably this will come up again with MERGE, and > perhaps other cases...
Unless the easiest way to implement MERGE is to extend RULEs. Actually, I found myself wondering about RULEs and FDWs, for that matter. There's not much synergy there now, but I can imagine RULEs being used to do rewriting for funkier FDW setups, which would be hard to do with TRIGGERs. For example, imagine you have a series of CSV FDWs which relate to segments of a postgres log. You want to query them like they were one table. How would you use triggers to do that? -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
