Re: UPDATE SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT ...) versus rules - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: UPDATE SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT ...) versus rules
Date
Msg-id 20140617124741.GC18143@awork2.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: UPDATE SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT ...) versus rules  (Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@dalibo.com>)
Responses Re: UPDATE SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT ...) versus rules  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2014-06-17 11:22:17 +0200, Vik Fearing wrote:
> On 06/17/2014 09:43 AM, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> > On 06/14/2014 09:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> > As I mentioned awhile ago, I'm thinking about implementing the
> >> > SQL-standard construct
> >> >
> >> >     UPDATE foo SET ..., (a,b,...) = (SELECT x,y,...), ...
> >> >
> >> > I've run into a rather nasty problem, which is how does this interact
> >> > with expansion of NEW references in ON UPDATE rules?  
> >
> > Was'nt there a plan (consensus?) about deprecating rules altogether ?
> 
> I believe that was just for user access to them, ie CREATE RULE.  I
> don't think there was ever question of purging them from the code base.

I don't think any such concensus has been made? I wish it were, but the
last discussions about it imo ended quite differently.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- Andres Freund                       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Hannu Krosing
Date:
Subject: Re: UPDATE SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT ...) versus rules
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Wait free LW_SHARED acquisition - v0.2