Re: VIEW problem
От | Tim Uckun |
---|---|
Тема | Re: VIEW problem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4.2.0.58.20001005023712.00a6ee50@mail.diligence.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | VIEW problem (Tim Uckun <tim@diligence.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: VIEW problem
|
Список | pgsql-general |
At 05:48 PM 10/5/2000 +1100, you wrote: >I believe this is because the OIDs are not identical. Internally, Postgres is >referring to the OIDs and not to the table name. Might be wrong, I am only a >postgres newbie, but I think this is the case. Interesting this makes sense. >I don't think it is a bug either, this is rather correct and prevents the >database from doing the wrong thing (your new table foo could be completely >different from the first table foo) Here I have to disagree with you. I can't believe that this behaviour was intended. A view is not materialized and it's simply a RULE which is to say that it's nothing more then a SQL statement. As long as that SQL statement is valid, parseable and returns a recordset it really ought not to care about oids. ---------------------------------------------- Tim Uckun Mobile Intelligence Unit. ---------------------------------------------- "There are some who call me TIM?" ----------------------------------------------
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: