David Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Apr 25, 2005, at 11:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (I have been thinking more and more that we should consider a wholesale
>> redesign of the rule mechanism, because it sure seems not to answer the
>> needs/expectations of a lot of people out there.
> I think that people are likely to confuse rules and triggers. The other
> issue is that they are not documented in such a way as to make them
> simple to understand. But beyond that, although I like Neil's
> suggestion better, rules work pretty well for what I need them for--the
> ability to INSERT, UPDATE, or DELETE on a view.
Well, they handle simple situations OK, but we keep seeing people get
burnt as soon as they venture into interesting territory. For instance,
if the view is a join, you can't easily make a rule that turns a delete
into deletions of both joined rows. And you'll get burnt if you try to
insert any volatile functions, because of the multiple-evaluation issue.
Etc.
Like I said, I don't have a better idea. Just a vague feeling of
dissatisfaction.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
