Re: [GENERAL] Another perplexity with PG rules

2006-02-26 Thread Ken Winter
List > Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Another perplexity with PG rules > > "Ken Winter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > After trying about a million things, I'm wondering about the meaning of > > "OLD." as the actions in a rule are successively execu

Re: [GENERAL] Another perplexity with PG rules

2006-02-26 Thread Tom Lane
"Ken Winter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > After trying about a million things, I'm wondering about the meaning of > "OLD." as the actions in a rule are successively executed. What I have done > assumes that: > ... > (b) The "OLD." values that appear in the second (INSERT) action in the rule > ar

[GENERAL] Another perplexity with PG rules

2006-02-24 Thread Ken Winter
I'm stumped on the following problem. Everything between the "---" rows should be executable. Please advise. ~ TIA ~ Ken --- -- Here's a table: CREATE TABLE public.person_h ( person_id bigint DEFAULT nextval('pop_seq'::text), effective_date_and_time timestamptz DEFAULT ('now