NikhilS wrote:
The argument I made for keeping the example around is not
dependent on
the assumption that using a rule is a good idea.  It's dependent on
 the established fact that we have recommended that in prior
releases, and therefore people are going to be seeing that
construct in real databases.

And they could refer back to the older version of the documentation
for it. In fact, we should mention that in the patch:

<note><para>If you have a partitioning setup that uses rules please refer to the 8.2 documentation on partitioning</para></note>


I would also add another sentence about *why* the recommendation was changed. We have one rule-based setup here, and it has been working flawlessly for us,... so personally I don't even know the reasons.

Best Regards
Michael Paesold

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
      subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
      message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to