Updateable views was:(Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS)

Started by Jaime Casanovaabout 20 years ago3 messageshackers
Jump to latest
#1Jaime Casanova
jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec

On 3/9/06, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:

Eh? I thought that it was just syntatic sugar that was missing. I've
built lots of updatable views manually; I don't see what's difficult about
it.

I think you'll find that corner cases like inserts involving nextval()
don't work real well with a rule-based updatable view. But perhaps I'm
just scarred by the many complaints we've had about rules. With a plain
unconditional DO INSTEAD rule it might be OK ...

regards, tom lane

the last time i talk with Bernd Helmle, he was preparing the code to
send to patches for discussion... that was two months ago...

the current code had problems with casts and i think with domains too...

i will contact with Bernd to know if he did some more work, if not i
can send to patches the latest path he sent me...

--
regards,
Jaime Casanova

"What they (MySQL) lose in usability, they gain back in benchmarks, and that's
all that matters: getting the wrong answer really fast."
Randal L. Schwartz

#2Richard Huxton
dev@archonet.com
In reply to: Jaime Casanova (#1)
Re: Updateable views was:(Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for SYNONYMS)

Jaime Casanova wrote:

On 3/9/06, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:

Eh? I thought that it was just syntatic sugar that was missing. I've
built lots of updatable views manually; I don't see what's difficult about
it.

I think you'll find that corner cases like inserts involving nextval()
don't work real well with a rule-based updatable view. But perhaps I'm
just scarred by the many complaints we've had about rules. With a plain
unconditional DO INSTEAD rule it might be OK ...

the last time i talk with Bernd Helmle, he was preparing the code to
send to patches for discussion... that was two months ago...

the current code had problems with casts and i think with domains too...

i will contact with Bernd to know if he did some more work, if not i
can send to patches the latest path he sent me...

I'd certainly be interested in having auto-updatable views in 8.2 - even
if it was only for the simplest of cases. If I can be of any help
testing etc. let me know.

--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd

#3Bernd Helmle
mailings@oopsware.de
In reply to: Richard Huxton (#2)
Re: Updateable views was:(Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for

--On Freitag, März 10, 2006 09:43:04 +0000 Richard Huxton
<dev@archonet.com> wrote:

I'd certainly be interested in having auto-updatable views in 8.2 - even
if it was only for the simplest of cases. If I can be of any help testing
etc. let me know.

Yeah, that would be cool. I've sent the latest patch to -hackers. Feel free
to check it out. I currently know that array fields (e.g. field[1]) causes
problems, but i'm pretty sure there's much more work left...

Bernd