Re: Values list-of-targetlists patch for comments (was Re: [PATCHES] 8.2 features?)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Values list-of-targetlists patch for comments (was Re: [PATCHES] 8.2 features?) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 28624.1154487120@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Values list-of-targetlists patch for comments (was Re: [PATCHES] (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Values list-of-targetlists patch for comments (was Re: [PATCHES]
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> What I'm inclined to do for 8.2 is to disallow OLD/NEW references in >> multi-element VALUES clauses; the feature is still tremendously useful >> without that. > Given the timing, this sounds like a reasonable approach. I agree that > the feature has lots of interesting uses -- I'd hate to see us lose > that. Disallowing OLD/NEW references doesn't contradict the spec in any > way AFAIK either. I don't think rules are in the spec at all ;-) ... so no, that's not a problem. My example demonstrated a pretty likely use: create rule r2 as on update to src doinsert into log values(old.*, 'old'), (new.*, 'new'); but for the moment we can tell people to work around it the way they always have: create rule r2 as on update to src doinsert into log select old.*, 'old' union all new.*, 'new'; or just use two separate INSERT commands in the rule. We oughta fix it later, but I don't feel ashamed to have a restriction like this in the first cut. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: