On Sat, May 19, 2007 at 01:41:47PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > I _could_ make tables that "correspond" > > to the views and put BEFORE INSERT triggers on them and > > have the triggers insert into the views (or the equalivent), > > but then the users would have to use the views for most > > things and the "corresponding tables" when doing a COPY > > or using the application's data import function. > > There's been previous discussion of allowing BEFORE INSERT triggers > on views, so long as the triggers always return NULL to suppress > the actual insertion attempt (ie, we'd move the "can't insert into > view" test out of the rewriter and put it downstream of trigger firing > in the executor). So far no one's figured out how to make that idea > work for UPDATE/DELETE, but maybe you could argue that even if it > only worked for INSERT it'd be a useful feature. It'd certainly solve > the problem for COPY.
What about adding COPY support to rules? ISTM if you want to copy into a view you probably want to insert into it as well, so why not use the same mechanism? Presumably a COPY rule would also be faster than a trigger. -- Jim Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell) ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
