Andy Ballingall <andy@areyoulocal.co.uk> schrieb:
> Hi Andreas,
>
> The rule you've given only works for an update which changes the name.
>
> If I do another update which changed the colour instead of the name, that
> rule wouldn't do the right thing.
Right.
> Instead, I'm looking for something which, with a single 'rule' (or whatever
> the mechanism ends up being), intercepts *any* update on apples, and applies
> the changes to the pears table instead, as if the only change that occurred
> was a change of table name.
My example was simple, right.
> I can achieve this in the application which generates the sql commands, but
> someone else suggested it was possible with rules, but it may not be the
> case.
Inside the rule you have the NEW-Variable with all values to update.
Read my other answer.
I'm not sure, perhaps it is possible to write a more generic rule.
>
> -----Original Message-----
Please, no top-posting with silly fullquote below.
HTH, Andreas
--
Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely
unintentional side effect. (Linus Torvalds)
Kaufbach, Saxony, Germany, Europe. N 51.05082°, E 13.56889°
