Andy Ballingall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > Hi Andreas, > > The rule you've given only works for an update which changes the name. > > If I do another update which changed the colour instead of the name, that > rule wouldn't do the right thing.
Right. > Instead, I'm looking for something which, with a single 'rule' (or whatever > the mechanism ends up being), intercepts *any* update on apples, and applies > the changes to the pears table instead, as if the only change that occurred > was a change of table name. My example was simple, right. > I can achieve this in the application which generates the sql commands, but > someone else suggested it was possible with rules, but it may not be the > case. Inside the rule you have the NEW-Variable with all values to update. Read my other answer. I'm not sure, perhaps it is possible to write a more generic rule. > > -----Original Message----- Please, no top-posting with silly fullquote below. HTH, Andreas -- Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect. (Linus Torvalds) Kaufbach, Saxony, Germany, Europe. N 51.05082°, E 13.56889° ---------------------------(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