--On Mittwoch, Juli 12, 2006 20:58:08 -0500 Jaime Casanova
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
if nobody step up i can do the list.
i think this is the last patch that he post:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-03/msg00586.php
The code drifted since then in some parts. I'll sent a
--On Mittwoch, Juli 12, 2006 09:30:38 -0700 Joe Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Jaime Casanova wrote:
is anybody working on the Bernd Helmle's updateable views patch? or
know what the status of this is?
I'm still working on this and trying to get all open issues done for 8.2
feature
On 7/13/06, Bernd Helmle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm still working on this and trying to get all open issues done for 8.2
feature freeze.
Sweet!
--
Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1300
EnterpriseDB Corporation| fax: 732.331.1301
33 Wood Ave S, 2nd Floor
On 7/13/06, Bernd Helmle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--On Mittwoch, Juli 12, 2006 20:58:08 -0500 Jaime Casanova
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
if nobody step up i can do the list.
i think this is the last patch that he post:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-03/msg00586.php
The
Hi,
is anybody working on the Bernd Helmle's updateable views patch? or
know what the status of this is?
--
regards,
Jaime Casanova
Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to
build bigger and better idiot-proof programs and the universe trying
to produce bigger and
Jaime Casanova wrote:
is anybody working on the Bernd Helmle's updateable views patch? or
know what the status of this is?
I was just wondering about this also. If no one else is working on it,
I'd like to try to push it through to completion for 8.2 myself. Can
anyone summarize what the
On 7/12/06, Joe Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jaime Casanova wrote:
is anybody working on the Bernd Helmle's updateable views patch? or
know what the status of this is?
I was just wondering about this also. If no one else is working on it,
I'd like to try to push it through to completion
Jaime Casanova wrote:
On 3/9/06, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com writes:
Eh? I thought that it was just syntatic sugar that was missing. I've
built lots of updatable views manually; I don't see what's difficult about
it.
I think you'll find that corner cases
--On Freitag, März 10, 2006 09:43:04 + Richard Huxton
dev@archonet.com wrote:
I'd certainly be interested in having auto-updatable views in 8.2 - even
if it was only for the simplest of cases. If I can be of any help testing
etc. let me know.
Yeah, that would be cool. I've sent the
On 3/9/06, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com writes:
Eh? I thought that it was just syntatic sugar that was missing. I've
built lots of updatable views manually; I don't see what's difficult about
it.
I think you'll find that corner cases like inserts
Greg Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think you want to extend the SQL syntax to allow updating views, and
implement plan nodes and executor functionality to handle them. So things
like this works:
UPDATE (SELECT id,val FROM t) SET val=0 where id 100
Then the rules you create on the views
--- Greg Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
- What if we cannot create one of the three
rules?
Make the rule not updateable at all?
Or create the rules we can? (i think this is
the correct)
I seem to be in the minority here. But I think
creating complex rules to
Hi,
I'm currently working with Bernd in an implementation
of updateable views and want to know the hacker's
opinion on this issue.
What features have to be implemented in a first
extension in order to the patch to be accepted? What
features can wait until a second extension?
This are my first
- What if we cannot create one of the three rules?
Make the rule not updateable at all?
Or create the rules we can? (i think this is the
correct)
I seem to be in the minority here. But I think creating complex rules to
fiddle with the updates to translate them to the underlying
On Sat, 07 Aug 2004 10:24:34 -0400, Jan Wieck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I have not heard of updatable subselects yet.
http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/ask/f?p=4950:8:6693556430011788783::NO::F4950_P8_DISPLAYID,F4950_P8_CRITERIA:273215737113,
| Here we update a join. [...]
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] update
|
On 8/3/2004 11:38 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
Scott Marlowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2004-08-03 at 13:05, CSN wrote:
Just wondering, is updateable views slated for a
future version of Postgresql? In addition to using
rules that is.
I would think that a basic fleshing out of the logic with
On Tuesday 03 August 2004 08:38 pm, Greg Stark wrote:
Scott Marlowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2004-08-03 at 13:05, CSN wrote:
Just wondering, is updateable views slated for a
future version of Postgresql? In addition to using
rules that is.
I would think that a basic
Scott Marlowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2004-08-03 at 13:05, CSN wrote:
Just wondering, is updateable views slated for a
future version of Postgresql? In addition to using
rules that is.
I would think that a basic fleshing out of the logic with some kind of
stored proc to make
I'm pressing ahead with trying to implement the SQL92 version of updateable
views. I'm trying to track down a copy of the SQL92 standard, I thought that
ANSI sold them, but I can only find SQL89 and SQL99 there; am I looking in
the wrong place?
Eric Nielsen
---(end of
Eric D Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm pressing ahead with trying to implement the SQL92 version of updateable
views. I'm trying to track down a copy of the SQL92 standard, I thought that
ANSI sold them, but I can only find SQL89 and SQL99 there; am I looking in
the wrong place?
I'm
After finding the SQL92 draft spec that Tom quoted from earlier I think I
understand the conditions for the spec's version of view updatability. I've
made few comments below on the conditions and I'ld appreciate it if anyone
would correct any mis-interpretations on my part.
12)A query
Eric D Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I beleive this should allow queries such as:
UPDATE (SELECT bar, baz FROM foo) SET bar=1 WHERE baz=2;
as well as the
CREATE VIEW foo_view AS SELECT bar, baz FROM foo;
UPDATE foo_view SET bar=1 WHERE baz==2;
DROP VIEW foo_view;
three-query analog.
Stanards URL's are in the developers FAQ.
---
Tom Lane wrote:
Eric D Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm pressing ahead with trying to implement the SQL92 version of updateable
views. I'm trying to track down a copy
Eric D Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The one place I haven't been able to use PostGreSQL to experiment is with
regards to updateable views. I've found a few threads in -general and -hackers
(including one linked from the ToDo list), but they all seem to die out without
really reaching any
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 15:26, Eric D Nielsen wrote:
The one place I haven't been able to use PostGreSQL to experiment is with
regards to updateable views. I've found a few threads in -general and -hackers
(including one linked from the ToDo list), but they all seem to die out without
really
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 15:26, Eric D Nielsen wrote:
The one place I haven't been able to use PostGreSQL to experiment is with
regards to updateable views. I've found a few threads in -general and -hackers
(including one linked from the ToDo list), but
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 15:26, Eric D Nielsen wrote:
The one place I haven't been able to use PostGreSQL to experiment is with
regards to updateable views. I've found a few threads in -general and -hac
kers
(including one linked from the ToDo list), but they all seem to die out wit
hout
Gavin Sherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I haven't had time to look into it further, but it occurs to me that
handling views which rely on joins would be far from trivial.
Views containing joins would not be updatable; problem solved. The set
of views the automatic-rule-generation machinery
Gavin Sherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I haven't had time to look into it further, but it occurs to me that
handling views which rely on joins would be far from trivial.
Views containing joins would not be updatable; problem solved.
I see how that is what the spec says, but aren't the
Eric D Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In either case is this a place where exceeding the spec would be a good
thing or a bad thing?
Unless there is an obvious definition of what updating a join means
(obvious not only to the implementor, but to the user) I think this
is dangerous territory.
Let me preface this by expressing my appreciation for all the hard work
for the people who develop, maintain, and support PostGreSQL. I've been
using it for a little over two years for a variety of projects and have
been extremely happy with both the software and the support on these lists.
31 matches
Mail list logo
