Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Lockable views - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Lockable views
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmobqqrm01B=7cQORw4msHKkCH5u9b5GUou+weOriNKN6uw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Lockable views  (Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@sraoss.co.jp>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Lockable views  (Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@sraoss.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 10:26 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@sraoss.co.jp> wrote:
>> True.  But the same exact analysis also applies to this definition,
>> which contains no subquery:
>>
>> CREATE VIEW v1 AS SELECT t1.* FROM t1, t2 WHERE t1.i = t2.i;
>
> That's not an updatable view, thus cannot be locked according to the
> proposed implementation.

Hmm, true.  Why exactly are we imposing the restriction to updateable
views, anyway?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Lockable views
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11