On Sun, Oct 04, 2009 at 11:42:45AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > > There are already patches to deal with the first, at least for the > > kinds of VIEWs where this can be deduced automatically, and people are > > starting to take on the second. > > How would we deal with VIEWs which weren't simple enough for automated > updating, then? > > I don't think that removing a major feature, one which some users have > written applications around, is even feasible. > > What would be the benefit of this radical proposal? > > --Josh Berkus >
When you speak of writing to a view, what do you mean exactly? Are we saying refresh a view or update the parent tables of a view? -- --Dan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
