Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS? |
Date | |
Msg-id | 200209281741.g8SHf4S15799@candle.pha.pa.us Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS? (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Responses |
Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS?
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Bruce Momjian writes: > > > Well, let's look at the common case. For proper view rules, these would > > all return the right values because the UPDATE in the rule would be > > returned. Is that what you mean? > > I guess that really depends on whether the rules are written to properly > constrain the writes to the view to the set of rows visible by the view. > For example, if a view v1 selects from a single table t1 constrained by a > search condition, and I do UPDATE v1 SET ...; without a condition, does > that affect all rows in t1? If not, then both our proposals are > equivalent, if yes, then the it's the user's fault, I suppose. Well, since we found that we can't get a perfect solution, I started to think of the common cases. First, there is the "log changes" type of rule, but that isn't INSTEAD, so it doesn't even apply here. We already know we want to return the result of the main query.CREATE RULE service_request_update AS -- UPDATE ruleON UPDATE TOservice_request DO INSERT INTO service_request_log (customer_id, description, mod_type) VALUES (old.customer_id,old.description, 'U');CREATE RULE service_request_delete AS -- DELETE ruleON DELETE TO service_requestDO INSERT INTO service_request_log (customer_id, description, mod_type) VALUES (old.customer_id, old.description,'D'); Second, there is the updatable view rule, that is INSTEAD, and relies on the primary key of the table:CREATE RULE view_realtable_insert AS -- INSERT ruleON INSERT TO view_realtable DO INSTEAD INSERT INTO realtable VALUES (new.col);CREATE RULE view_realtable_update AS -- UPDATE ruleON UPDATE TOview_realtable DO INSTEAD UPDATE realtable SET col = new.col WHERE col = old.col;CREATE RULE view_realtable_deleteAS -- DELETE ruleON DELETE TO view_realtable DO INSTEAD DELETE FROM realtable WHERE col= old.col; It is my understanding that the proposed rule result improvements will return the proper values in these cases. That is why I like the current proposal. It also makes any extra non-tag matching queries in the rule not affect the result, which seems best. Does anyone else have a common rule that would return incorrect results using the proposed rules? -- 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, Pennsylvania19073
pgsql-hackers by date: