Sridhar N Bamandlapally writes:
> Is there a way to avoid creating rule under creation of view ?
If you mean the ON SELECT rule, no. A view basically *is* an ON SELECT
rule; there's not very much else to it. What usefulness do you imagine
you'd get from a view without ON SELECT?
Hi
Is there a way to avoid creating rule under creation of view ?
please let me know
Thanks
Sridhar
it is in postgres i need to convert into oracle
CREATE RULE payment_insert_p2007_04 AS ON INSERT TO payment WHERE
(new.payment_date >= '2007-04-01'::timestamp without time zone) DO INSTEAD
INSERT INTO payment_p2007_04 (payment_id)VALUES (1);
in oracle format i used google
i got
BEGIN
DBMS_MACAD
On 01/28/2013 02:19 AM, Leif Jensen wrote:
Hello.
We have a system that has been running using PostgreSQL 8.4. We have now
upgraded to PostgreSQL 9.1. The system has several rules on views and now most
of these does not seem to work anymore. It is rather simple rules with mainly
only
Hello.
We have a system that has been running using PostgreSQL 8.4. We have now
upgraded to PostgreSQL 9.1. The system has several rules on views and now most
of these does not seem to work anymore. It is rather simple rules with mainly
only 1 replacement sql (update for 'on update' and i
Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 09:32:32AM +, Jason Dusek wrote:
>> Why are the individual indices not useful? The tests that the
>> query does -- equality on key and realm and ordering on at --
>> are each supported by indices. Does it have to do with the cost
>> of l
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 09:32:32AM +, Jason Dusek wrote:
> 2012/8/23 Tom Lane :
> > Jason Dusek writes:
> >> CREATE TABLE kv
> >> ( k bytea NOT NULL,
> >> at timestamptz NOT NULL,
> >> realm bytea NOT NULL,
> >> v bytea NOT NULL );
> >> CREATE INDEX ON kv USING hash(k);
> >>
2012/8/23 Tom Lane :
> Jason Dusek writes:
>> I have a simple table of keys and values which periodically
>> receives updated values. It's desirable to keep older values
>> but, most of the time, we query only for the latest value of a
>> particular key.
>
>> CREATE TABLE kv
>> ( k bytea NOT N
Jason Dusek writes:
> I have a simple table of keys and values which periodically
> receives updated values. It's desirable to keep older values
> but, most of the time, we query only for the latest value of a
> particular key.
> CREATE TABLE kv
> ( k bytea NOT NULL,
> at timestamptz NOT
Hello List,
I have a simple table of keys and values which periodically
receives updated values. It's desirable to keep older values
but, most of the time, we query only for the latest value of a
particular key.
CREATE TABLE kv
( k bytea NOT NULL,
at timestamptz NOT NULL,
realm bytea
Hi,
On 16 February 2012 01:14, Robert James wrote:
> What rules of thumb exist for:
> * How often a table needs to be vacuumed?
> * How often a table needs to be analyzed?
> * How to tune Autovacuum?
I prefer to use autovacuum daemon and sets thresholds on per table
basis i.e. sets reasonable de
Thanks. What about auto-analyze? When will they be analyzed by default?
And what actions generally require new analyze?
On 2/15/12, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 09:14:34AM -0500, Robert James wrote:
>> What rules of thumb exist for:
>> * How often a table needs to be vacuumed?
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 09:14:34AM -0500, Robert James wrote:
> What rules of thumb exist for:
> * How often a table needs to be vacuumed?
> * How often a table needs to be analyzed?
> * How to tune Autovacuum?
>
> I have a large DB server, and I'm concerned that it's not being
> autovaccumed and
What rules of thumb exist for:
* How often a table needs to be vacuumed?
* How often a table needs to be analyzed?
* How to tune Autovacuum?
I have a large DB server, and I'm concerned that it's not being
autovaccumed and autoanalyzed frequently enough. But I have no idea
what proper values shoul
You're right, rules are perfect for very limited and narrow cases. And
make it very hard to write complicated queries against. (i.e., updates
that only touch few columns, likewise with inserts).
I'm guessing the upside is that rules are faster then triggers.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list
> -Original Message-
> From: Gregg Jaskiewicz [mailto:gryz...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2011 5:18 AM
> To: Igor Neyman
> Cc: Ondrej Ivanič; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Rules going away
>
> speaking of DO INSTEAD, for inser
speaking of DO INSTEAD, for insert/update case. Try using RETURNING
with that and rules ;) Good luck
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
> -Original Message-
> From: Ondrej Ivanič [mailto:ondrej.iva...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 6:47 PM
> To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: Rules going away
>
> Hi,
>
> > folks, don't use RULES! use triggers -- and as much as possible, keep
> > triggers sim
Hi,
> folks, don't use RULES! use triggers -- and as much as possible, keep
> triggers simple, short, and to the point (simple validation, custom
> RI, auditing/logging, etc).
I like them :). 'DO INSTEAD' rules are great for partitioning so you
can insert (or update) to parent table and 'DO INSTE
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Rob Sargent wrote:
>
>
> On 09/28/2011 08:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andrew Sullivan writes:
>>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 06:20:04AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
There's an even better reason not to use rules: they're going away in
a not too distant version
On 09/28/2011 08:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Sullivan writes:
>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 06:20:04AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
>>> There's an even better reason not to use rules: they're going away in
>>> a not too distant version of PostgreSQL.
>> Really? How? I thought views were done us
On 6 Jul 2010, at 13:03, Andre Lopes wrote:
> Hi Alban,
>
> But in my application I have more than one way of uniquely identify the
> record. Could be by the email field or by the id field.
Unique is unique. There is no other record that could possibly be identified by
the same unique identifi
Hi Alban,
But in my application I have more than one way of uniquely identify the
record. Could be by the email field or by the id field.
Thera are update that are done by the WHERE email clause and other by the
WHERE id clause.
It is possible to deal with this?
Best Regards,
On Tue, Jul 6,
On 6 Jul 2010, at 12:28, Andre Lopes wrote:
> Now I need also to add an INSTEAD UPDATE rule and an INSTEAD DELETE rule, but
> I have some doubts about it... let me explain...
>
> Ok, I need to create an INSTEAD UPDATE rule in this view, but I don't know
> how to use the clause WHERE in the UPDA
Hi,
I'am using rules in views, but I'am not sure about how the rules work... let
me explain...
For example, I have this table:
[code]
CREATE TABLE "atau_utilizadores" (
"id" int4 NOT NULL,
"group_id" int4 NOT NULL,
"ip_address" char(16) NOT NULL,
"username" varchar(50) NOT NULL,
Hi,
I'am using rules in views, but I'am not sure about how the rules work... let
me explain...
For example, I have this table:
[code]
CREATE TABLE "atau_utilizadores" (
"id" int4 NOT NULL,
"group_id" int4 NOT NULL,
"ip_address" char(16) NOT NULL,
"username" varchar(50) NOT NULL,
Le mercredi 9 décembre 2009 à 17:04:32, George Silva a écrit :
> Hello all again :)
>
> I have a question: is it possible to replicate the behavior of a rule
> INSTEAD of with a TRIGGER?
>
> For some specific reasons i need to use a trigger to update a
> secondary table, but i don't want the chan
Hello all again :)
I have a question: is it possible to replicate the behavior of a rule
INSTEAD of with a TRIGGER?
For some specific reasons i need to use a trigger to update a
secondary table, but i don't want the changes to happen in the primary
table too.
Is it possible to do it? If so, how?
Le mercredi 9 décembre 2009 à 12:38:33, George Silva a écrit :
> Hello guys,
>
> Still having some trouble with this.
>
> I'm trying to use a case when, but postgres is still giving me syntax
> error.
>
> CREATE OR REPLACE RULE instead_update AS ON UPDATE TO foo
> DO INSTEAD
> (
> CASE SELECT e
Hello guys,
Still having some trouble with this.
I'm trying to use a case when, but postgres is still giving me syntax error.
CREATE OR REPLACE RULE instead_update AS ON UPDATE TO foo
DO INSTEAD
(
CASE SELECT exists(SELECT 1 FROM versioning.foo_version_1 WHERE
OLD.oid = NEW.oid) as a WHEN a=true
On Wednesday 9. December 2009 09.06.12 Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
> Le mercredi 9 décembre 2009 à 01:52:03, George Silva a écrit :
> > [...]
> > I can't seem to understand why a simples if is not working on the
> > creation of rules.
> >
> > I tried both ways (am i missing something?):
> >
>
> Sur
Le mercredi 9 décembre 2009 à 01:52:03, George Silva a écrit :
> [...]
> I can't seem to understand why a simples if is not working on the
> creation of rules.
>
> I tried both ways (am i missing something?):
>
Sure. IF does not exist in SQL, and you can only put SQL statements in a rule.
Inste
Hello guys,
I can't seem to understand why a simples if is not working on the
creation of rules.
I tried both ways (am i missing something?):
Take a look:
CREATE OR REPLACE RULE instead_update AS ON UPDATE TO foo
DO INSTEAD
(
IF exists(SELECT 1 FROM versioning.foo_version_1 WHERE oid =
James B. Byrne wrote:
> The situation is this. A dependent table relationship is episodic. In other
> words, a product might be available for a period of time, then not available,
> then available again. Or, a firm might be a client for a period, then not,
> then again. Or a person might be an
This might be a little off topic and it may show a degree of naivety on my
part but I have a small problem with coding a Ruby on Rails application and it
seems to me that the best answer may reside in the database itself.
The situation is this. A dependent table relationship is episodic. In othe
Albe Laurenz wrote:
srdjan wrote:
What is the desired response to
INSERT INTO vvv (name, town, num) VALUES ('Karl', 'Leipzig', 18);
Should this generate an error message, do nothing, or insert something?
In this case you shouldn't be able to do this insert.
Should it generate
Albe Laurenz wrote:
srdjan wrote:
I'll try to explain my problem with an example.
-- I've got 2 tables and one view
CREATE TABLE a (name varchar(20) primary key, num integer);
CREATE TABLE b (town varchar(15), name varchar(20) references a(name));
CREATE VIEW vvv AS SELECT * FROM a NATUR
srdjan wrote:
>>> -- I've got 2 tables and one view
>>> CREATE TABLE a (name varchar(20) primary key, num integer);
>>> CREATE TABLE b (town varchar(15), name varchar(20) references a(name));
>>>
>>> insert into a values ('tom',5);
>>> insert into a values ('paul',99);
>>> insert into a value
srdjan wrote:
>> What is the desired response to
>>
>> INSERT INTO vvv (name, town, num) VALUES ('Karl', 'Leipzig', 18);
>>
>> Should this generate an error message, do nothing, or insert something?
>
> In this case you shouldn't be able to do this insert.
Should it generate an error message or
srdjan wrote:
> I'll try to explain my problem with an example.
>
> -- I've got 2 tables and one view
> CREATE TABLE a (name varchar(20) primary key, num integer);
> CREATE TABLE b (town varchar(15), name varchar(20) references a(name));
>
> CREATE VIEW vvv AS SELECT * FROM a NATURAL JOIN b;
Hi to everyone.
I'll try to explain my problem with an example.
-- I've got 2 tables and one view
CREATE TABLE a (name varchar(20) primary key, num integer);
CREATE TABLE b (town varchar(15), name varchar(20) references a(name));
insert into a values ('tom',5);
insert into a values ('paul',99);
On Nov 26, 2007, at 6:09 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Mon, 2007-11-26 at 16:01 -0800, Alex Vinogradovs wrote:
I've got a data warehouse with pretty high rate of insert into
partitioned tables. What I've noticed, is that rule-based
partitioning
seems to be somewhat slower than insertions made dir
On Mon, 2007-11-26 at 16:01 -0800, Alex Vinogradovs wrote:
> I've got a data warehouse with pretty high rate of insert into
> partitioned tables. What I've noticed, is that rule-based partitioning
> seems to be somewhat slower than insertions made directly into
> partitions through execution of dy
Hi all,
I've got a data warehouse with pretty high rate of insert into
partitioned tables. What I've noticed, is that rule-based partitioning
seems to be somewhat slower than insertions made directly into
partitions through execution of dynamic SQL.
Is it really true ?
Thanks!
Best regards,
Josh Harrison escribió:
> Hello,
> I have a question in the postgres document chapter 34. Rules and Command
> Status.
> The last paragraph of that page says that
>
> "The programmer can ensure that any desired INSTEAD rule is the one that
> sets the command status in the second case, by giving it
Hello,
I have a question in the postgres document chapter 34. Rules and Command
Status.
The last paragraph of that page says that
"The programmer can ensure that any desired INSTEAD rule is the one that
sets the command status in the second case, by giving it the alphabetically
last rule name amon
"Roberto Icardi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Everything works perfectly... BUT the query returns always 0 rows affected,
> even if one record is inserted or deleted in friends_hobbies...why??
The rules for this are explained here:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/static/rules-status.html
If
Hi all... I'm experimenting for the first time with rules to make a view
updatable, but I've found a strange "effect"...
I'll try to explain what I'm trying to achieve
Suppose I have a table "friends" and a table "hobbies". Each friend can be
interested in one or more hobbies:
CREATE TABLE fr
I am attempting to accomplish a soft delete with a system using
PostgreSQL, Hibernate, and EJB3(JBoss). I have set up tables with a
column to indicate deleted state. What is the best way to accomplish
this? I have looked into triggers and rules but end up with the same
problem. How can I return to
Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> Well, I notice that the SQL standard defines something called WITH, so
> what you want is something like:
> WITH OLD AS ( SELECT blah )
> DO
> ( UPDATE
> ; DELETE )
I think it'd be a mistake to assume that WITH would fix Markus'
complaint. I haven't studied th
On Sun, May 14, 2006 at 08:01:39AM +0200, Markus Schiltknecht wrote:
> > What you probably want is a function that is given the row and then
> > executes the two statements on a per row basis. This has the effect you
> > want but gives up the major benefit of rules, wholesale query
> > restructurin
Hi Martijn,
On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 18:05 +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> But it can't really. In the example that started this thread, there are
> two seperate rules and after rewriting the executor will be presented
> two seperate queries.
Ah, thank you, that explains the difficulties with
On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 04:22:00PM +0200, Markus Schiltknecht wrote:
> > There have been discussions about the problems
>
> Do you have some pointers here? I did not find relevant discussions in
> the archives (of gmane.org)
Hmm, maybe not so much discussions as comments from developers when the
> Well, triggers cannot be used to create writeable views, can they?
The documentation says that triggers can be used on views but only for Inserts;
not updates or
deletes.
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/interactive/rules-triggers.html
Regards,
Richard
---(end of b
On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 15:57 +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> It's a known problem. It's also one of the reasons why triggers are
> recommended over rules. And it's not desirable behaviour.
Well, triggers cannot be used to create writeable views, can they?
> There have been discussions about
On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 03:51:18PM +0200, Markus Schiltknecht wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was trying to create an updateable view. Suddenly I got foreign key
> violations when using nextval('myseq').
>
> As I understand, the rewriter does something similar to a simple text
> replacement (I guess copying t
Hi,
I was trying to create an updateable view. Suddenly I got foreign key
violations when using nextval('myseq').
As I understand, the rewriter does something similar to a simple text
replacement (I guess copying the plan tree nodes?) so that nextval gets
evaluated again for every rule that appli
This is best done by using a trigger on the table.
http://www.varlena.com/GeneralBits/38.php shows how
to do it with both a trigger and with a rule.
--elein
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 04:48:28PM -0400, Sean Hamilton wrote:
> I have to log each time a user selects data from a table
On 5/5/06, Sean Hamilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have to log each time a user selects data from a table by inserting
record in another table.
For example
I have table xzy
user test selects id, name from table xyz.
I want to insert into table xyz_log
user, action, fields, timestamp
test, sele
quot;
To: ,
Subject: audit table containing Select statements submitted
Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 12:45:59 -0500
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sean Hamilton
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 3:48 PM
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: [GENERAL
I have to log each time a user selects data from a table by inserting
record in another table.
For example
I have table xzy
user test selects id, name from table xyz.
I want to insert into table xyz_log
user, action, fields, timestamp
test, select, id name, 12/1/05 02:00:21
How can i do this u
On Jan 11, 2006, at 21:15 , William Leite Araújo wrote:
CREATE OR REPLACE RULE select_public_cliente AS ON SELECT TO
public.cliente_tipo
ERROR: event qualifications are not implemented for rules on SELECT
As the error message indicates, RULEs are not applicable to ON
SELECT. Use a vie
Hi, I'm trying create the rule :
CREATE OR REPLACE RULE select_public_cliente AS ON SELECT TO public.cliente_tipo
WHERE NOT EXISTS ( SELECT usesysid
FROM pg_user left join pg_group on ( idx( grolist, usesysid ) > 0 )
WHERE usename = current_user
On 8/22/05, Pailloncy Jean-Gerard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,With PostgreSQL 7.4.6.I have a table aaa (id serial, maj timestamp without time zone)I defined to function from_timestamp and to_timestamp to doconversion between text and timestamp with few checks and tricks.
I defined a view aab (id
Hi,
With PostgreSQL 7.4.6.
I have a table aaa (id serial, maj timestamp without time zone)
I defined to function from_timestamp and to_timestamp to do
conversion between text and timestamp with few checks and tricks.
I defined a view aab (id serial, maj text) as "SELECT id,
from_timestamp(
Thanks for the info guys; got a better understanding now.
--
Randall Perry
sysTame
Xserve Web Hosting/Co-location
Website Development/Promotion
Mac Consulting/Sales
http://www.systame.com/
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our e
Am Dienstag, 26. Juli 2005 23:53 schrieb Randall Perry:
> Read the Rules section of the manual and the section on Rules vs Triggers.
>
> From what I get triggers are necessary for column constraints. As far as
> speed, it seems there are some differences between how fast rules/triggers
> would do t
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2005-07-26 17:53:35 -0400:
> Read the Rules section of the manual and the section on Rules vs Triggers.
>
> From what I get triggers are necessary for column constraints. As far as
> speed, it seems there are some differences between how fast rules/triggers
> would do the sam
Read the Rules section of the manual and the section on Rules vs Triggers.
>From what I get triggers are necessary for column constraints. As far as
speed, it seems there are some differences between how fast rules/triggers
would do the same action, but that some complex analysis is involved to
de
I'm renaming a table to a live database before it goes REALLY live
and ends up on lots of servers. For various reasons I've got various
different clients floating around and can't get them all updated
synchronously.
anyways.
How do I make a set of rules to pass insert/update/delete/...
On Behalf Of Mariusz Czu³ada
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 7:29 AM
To: Postgres General
Subject: [GENERAL] Rules on select
Hi,
I tried to create rule on a view. It should contain a WHERE clause.
Unfortunately it does not work:
a_4m=# CREATE RULE sharp_p1_rule AS ON SELECT TO sharp
a_4m
Hi,
I tried to create rule on a view. It should contain a WHERE clause.
Unfortunately it does not work:
a_4m=# CREATE RULE sharp_p1_rule AS ON SELECT TO sharp
a_4m-# WHERE part_key = 1
a_4m-# DO
a_4m-# INSTEAD SELECT * FROM sharp_p1;
ERROR: ON SELECT rule may not use OLD
a_4m=# CREATE RU
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 04:15:54PM +1100, Jamie Deppeler wrote:
> i have a join table eg
>
> primarykey
> field1
> field2
>
> and based on SQL Select have the values of field1 inserted into a new
> table which will scroll which will launch a trigger but im having
> problems getting this to wor
Hi,
What i am trying to do is
i have a join table eg
primarykey
field1
field2
and based on SQL Select have the values of field1 inserted into a new
table which will scroll which will launch a trigger but im having
problems getting this to work? Any ideas anyone?
sql select may return 1 or more r
>> Planning on witting a rule for a view, and i was wondering if anyone
>> could suggest a good Internet resource?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org
>
> (Sorry, couldn't resist.)
>
But here is a simple working example of making a view updatable:
CREATE TABLE consumable (
consumable_pk serial NOT
> Planning on witting a rule for a view, and i was wondering if anyone
> could suggest a good Internet resource?
http://www.postgresql.org
(Sorry, couldn't resist.)
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map sett
Have you looked at the html docs? It looks like "34.2. Views and the Rule
System" might be what you are looking for, but I didn't check it closely.
On Thursday 02 December 2004 05:34 pm, Jamie Deppeler saith:
> HI,
>
> Planning on witting a rule for a view, and i was wondering if anyone
> could s
HI,
Planning on witting a rule for a view, and i was wondering if anyone
could suggest a good Internet resource?
thx
begin:vcard
fn:Jamie Deppeler
n:Deppeler;Jamie
org:Once;Development
adr:;;46 Roseneath Street;North Geelong;Vic;3215;Australia
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Database Admin
Hi,
Citing Jamie Deppeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> sample sql querty
>
> INSERT INTO schema.table2
> (
> "field1",
> "field2",
> "field3",
> "field4",
> "field5",
> "field6",
> "field7",
> "field8",
> "field9",
> )
> VALUES
> (
> SELECT
>
This may be a bit of stupid question but it is the first time i have
played around with rules and i am trying to convert a sql statement into
a rule
sample sql querty
INSERT INTO schema.table2
(
"field1",
"field2",
"field3",
"field4",
"field5",
"field6",
"field7",
On Wed, 2004-11-17 at 12:49, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-11-17 at 11:49, Michael Fuhr wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 11:20:41AM -0500, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
> >
> > > I have a view that used union all to merge three tables together. I was
> > > hoping to create a rule, one for
On Wed, 2004-11-17 at 11:49, Michael Fuhr wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 11:20:41AM -0500, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> > I have a view that used union all to merge three tables together. I was
> > hoping to create a rule, one for each table using the WHERE condition of
> > the rule to determin
On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 11:20:41AM -0500, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
> I have a view that used union all to merge three tables together. I was
> hoping to create a rule, one for each table using the WHERE condition of
> the rule to determine which table gets updated. Is this possible?
See the CREA
I have a view that used union all to merge three tables together. I was
hoping to create a rule, one for each table using the WHERE condition of
the rule to determine which table gets updated. Is this possible?
This is what I have, assume the view here is a merge of three tables
using union all:
Hello,
If I have a rule like this:
CREATE OR REPLACE RULE sometable_update AS ON UPDATE TO table2 DO UPDATE
cache SET updated_dt=NULL WHERE tablename='sometable';
CREATE OR REPLACE RULE sometable_insert AS ON INSERT TO table2 DO UPDATE
cache SET updated_dt=NULL WHERE tablename='sometable';
CREAT
I am starting to work with rules. I think I have them down but the
folowing one is giving me grief. It tells me that it has rewritten 100
times and probably has looped. The columns ID and Location make up the
primary key so I am sure that the result update should only effect one
row. Anyone
Hello. Only a question.
I have a table and want to make a view updateable with rules. Table has a
sequence that creates default value to primary key when inserting.
And now the question: Is it posible to return value of primary key from
rule of inserting with NEW? Is that value what i would
I'd like to know in what order are rules executed, comparing to the
queries that generated them.
For instance, supose that a INSERT on table A has a rule to update a
column in table B. What will be executed first: the INSERT or UPDATE?
Tks
--
Nelio Alves Pereira Filho
IFX Networks - www.ifx.com
After my last email, I added the rest of the rule actions. So the
relevant part of the schema now looks like this:
CREATE RULE update_msg_stats
AS ON INSERT TO messages DO (
UPDATE users SET num_posts = num_posts + 1
WHERE users.id = new.poster;
UPDATE threads SET
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would expect the rule it cause a bit of overhead (maybe
> taking twice or three times as long as w/o the rule), but
> it's taking ~52x longer.
Ouch.
> I've tried creating an index on messages.poster, but it has
> no effect (performance is the same). I
In testing my database, I've encountered what appears to be a
concerning performance problem using a rule (ON INSERT). Here's
the situation:
Every time a row is inserted into a table (called 'messages'), I want
to increment a counter in a different table (called 'users'). The
best way I could thi
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is the INSERT rule re-ordering mentioned a TODO item?
Darn if I know. I threw the thought out for discussion, but didn't
see any comments. I'm not in a hurry to change it, unless there's
consensus that we should.
regards, tom
Is the INSERT rule re-ordering mentioned a TODO item?
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I thought an INSERT rule with an UPDATE action would work on the same
> > table, but that fails. Seems the rule is firing before the INSERT
> > happens.
>
> Yes, a trigger is the right way to d
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I thought an INSERT rule with an UPDATE action would work on the same
> > table, but that fails. Seems the rule is firing before the INSERT
> > happens.
>
> Yes, a trigger is the right way to do surgery on a tuple before it is
> stored. Rules are
ECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, May 20, 2000 2:00 AM
Subject: [GENERAL] rules on INSERT can't UPDATE new instance?
>
> From the create_rule man page this example is offered:
>
> CREATE RULE example_5 AS
>ON INERT TO emp WHERE new.salary >
From the create_rule man page this example is offered:
CREATE RULE example_5 AS
ON INERT TO emp WHERE new.salary > 5000
DO
UPDATE NEWSET SET salary = 5000;
But what is "NEWSET"? Is it a keyword?
My problem is that on an insert with an invalid amount I try t
I am in the process of creating a large relational database. One of the key
things I need to include in this database is a system to maintain data
integrity across multiple tables.
here's an example:
Table: items
item_id description vendor_id model
cost
stuff1
Hi ppl
I've started to use rules. Something strange with one of them:
AIX 4.1
PostgreSQL 6.4
create word_list (id int4, word char(15), count int4 default 0);
CREATE
create unique index word_list_word_uidx on word_list (word);
CREATE
...
(something inserted into word_list)
create table temp (word
98 matches
Mail list logo
