Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> I seriously doubt that there are many applications out there that are > >> actually depending on this aspect of rule execution; if anything, there > >> are probably more that will see it as a bug. > > > Changing EXPLAIN ANALYZE seems a bit less likely to break things for > > anyone depending on current behavior; > > Well, the point I was trying to make is that there may well be fewer > people depending on the current behavior than there are people for whom > the current behavior is wrong, only they don't know it because they've > not seen a failure (or not seen one often enough to diagnose what's > happening). > > This is of course merest speculation either way. But I don't feel that > we need to necessarily treat rule behavior as graven in stone.
Where are we on this? It seems it is an issue independent of writable common table expressions (wCTEs). -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
