Re: WIP: Automatic view update rules - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bernd Helmle
Subject Re: WIP: Automatic view update rules
Date
Msg-id 49290.62.152.162.10.1230584023.squirrel@tooney.at.xencon.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WIP: Automatic view update rules  ("Jaime Casanova" <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>)
List pgsql-hackers
> On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 9:29 AM, Bernd Helmle <bernd@oopsware.de> wrote:

>
> i would say check for negative attnums and deny that view to be
> updateable because of SQL92 says in 11.19 <view definition> syntax
> rule 6:
> """
>          6) If the <query expression> is updatable, then the viewed table
> is
>             an updatable table. Otherwise, it is a read-only table.
> """
> wich i understand as deny updatability in any view that constains non
> updateable <query expression> in the target list
>

Yes, but afaiks SQL99 allows partial updatable column lists, so we could
argue that we can follow this. However, it seems your approach is better
for now.

>
> yes. if we didn't do that we will be against spec. syntax rule 12
> (again in 11.19 <view definition> ) says:
> """
>          12)If WITH CHECK OPTION is specified, then the viewed table shall
>             be updatable.
>
> """

Okay.

I'm currently travelling (visiting my parents during turn of the year),
checking my mail sporadically. I'll provide an updated patch ASAP.

Bernd




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: TODO items for window functions
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Idea - fallback mode for psql backslash commands using information_schema