On 8/24/06, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bernd Helmle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> While working on Alvaro's suggestions to fix the code i got the opinion
> that we need to reject any attempts to name a user defined rule
> as
> "_INSERT"
> "_NOTHING_INSERT"
> "_DELETE"
> "_NOTHING_DELETE"
> "_UPDATE"
> "_NOTHING_UPDATE"
If the code is dependent on recognizing names to know what it's doing,
then I'd say you have a fundamentally broken approach. Consider adding
a flag column to pg_rewrite to distinguish these rules, instead.
Actually the code delete implicit rules based on a field added to
pg_rewrite but that catalog has a unique index on ev_class, rulename:
"pg_rewrite_rel_rulename_index" UNIQUE, btree (ev_class, rulename)
i guess bernd's comment is about this index giving an error if we try
to insert the new rule with the same name on the same event...
--
regards,
Jaime Casanova
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to
build bigger and better idiot-proof programs and the universe trying
to produce bigger and better idiots.
So far, the universe is winning."
Richard Cook
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
