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

From Vik Fearing
Subject Re: UPDATE SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT ...) versus rules
Date
Msg-id 53A008C9.6090907@dalibo.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: UPDATE SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT ...) versus rules  (Hannu Krosing <hannu@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: UPDATE SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT ...) versus rules  (Hannu Krosing <hannu@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Re: UPDATE SET (a,b,c) = (SELECT ...) versus rules  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
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.
-- 
Vik



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: xbzhang
Date:
Subject: Re: How to implement the skip errors for copy from ?
Next
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: Window function optimisation, allow pushdowns of items matching PARTITION BY clauses