Re: Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Steve Howe
Subject Re: Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue
Date
Msg-id 7171134999.20020910002548@carcass.dhs.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hello Bruce,

Monday, September 9, 2002, 11:13:20 PM, you wrote:

BM> Steve Howe wrote:
>> Because the affected commands are supposed to give you back
>> information on what your INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE commands, not what is
>> making behind the scenes.
>> 
>> And it seems that other people in the thread agree with me, please
>> read thread.
>> 
>> Since you are probably very familiar with the rules system, why don't
>> you vote on a proposal too, or just suggest yours. Your opinion is
>> very important. I'm not saying I'm the truth owner; I'm just another
>> developer who needs a feature working again.

BM> Jan actually did vote in the first round which appears in TODO.detail. 
BM> He voted that if the INSTEAD rule had only _one_ statement, return that,
BM> if not, return nothing.
We still need Tom's word and Hiroshi, since they were the most related
to the subject, and the other developer's opinion... :)

------------- 
Best regards,Steve Howe                           mailto:howe@carcass.dhs.org



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Sean Chittenden
Date:
Subject: Re: Optimization levels when compiling PostgreSQL...
Next
From: Steve Howe
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: Solving the "Return proper affected tuple