On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:04 AM, Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rash...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > I think the policies applied should depend on the path taken, so if it >> > does an INSERT, then only the INSERT CHECK policy should be applied >> > (after the insert), but if it ends up doing an UPDATE, I would expect >> > the UPDATE USING policy to be applied (before the update) and the >> > UPDATE CHECK policy to be applied (after the update). I would not >> > expect the INSERT CHECK policy to be applied on the UPDATE path. >> >> I agree. > > I can certainly understand the appeal of this approach, but I don't > think it makes sense. Consider what happens later on down the road, > after the code has been written and deployed using INSERT .. ON CONFLICT > UPDATE where 99% of the time only one path or the other is taken. Then > the other path is taken and suddenly the exact same command and row ends > up returning errors.
I'd say: that's life. If you don't test your policies, they might not work. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
