Re: [GENERAL] INSTEAD rule bug?

Tom Lane wrote:
> DeJuan Jackson <djackson@speedfc.com> writes:
> >   Or is it simply any conditional rule using UNION/EXCEPT/INTERSECT/...?
>
> Yeah, that's about the size of it :-(.  Note though that you could
> probably work around the problem by pushing the UNION etc. down into a
> sub-select:
>     SELECT * FROM (SELECT ... UNION ...) foo;
>
> At some point we could look at automatically transforming the query in
> that way, but I'm not planning to worry about it now.

What does the code do now after you changed it?  Fail on the UNION
query?

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073