Jan Wieck writes:
I think we will have no chance to really return the number of
VIEW-tuples affected. So any implementation is only a guess and we could
simply return fixed 42 if some tuples where affected at all. This
return is as wrong (according to Steve) as everything else but at least
What is the difference
between a trigger, a rule and an instead rule from a business process
oriented point of view? I think there is none at all. They are just
different techniques to do one and the same, implement
business logic in the database system.
The difference is how other db's
On Mon, 2002-09-09 at 21:25, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
And this has got to be trolling: PostgreSQL is one of the _most_
stability and correctness focused software projects I've ever known. In
this particular case, the complaints about this issue where Your bugfix
broke my tool! make it better!
Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
All the problems here are coming from INSTEAD rules. We don't have
INSTEAD triggers or contraints.
Sure we do, well sort of. :)
Make a before trigger that does a different statement and returns NULL
to abort
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why is rules firing in an unpredicatable order a bug but returned
affected tuple count is wrong just a compatibility issue ?
Afaik, rule firing order has never been promised, while pqCmdTuples()
has.
There has never been any spec saying exactly what
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Stephan Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
All the problems here are coming from INSTEAD rules. We don't have
INSTEAD triggers or contraints.
Sure we do, well sort of. :)
Make a before trigger that does a
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Jan Wieck wrote:
We should surely keep this on a much more technical level and avoid any
personal offendings. To do so, please explain to me why you think that
triggers and constraints are out of focus here? What is the difference
between a trigger, a rule and an
Jan Wieck wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Jan Wieck wrote:
We should surely keep this on a much more technical level and avoid any
personal offendings. To do so, please explain to me why you think that
triggers and constraints are out of focus here? What is the difference
between a
Steve Howe wrote:
Hello all,
PostgreSQL *still* has a bug where PQcmdStatus() won't return the
number of rows updated. But that is essential for applications, since
without it of course we don't know if the updates/delete/insert
commands succeded. Even worst, on interfaces like
Steve Howe wrote:
Hello Bruce,
Friday, September 6, 2002, 9:52:18 PM, you wrote:
BM I am not any happier about it than you are. Your report is good because
BM it is the first case where returning the wrong value actually breaks
BM software. You may be able to justify adding a fix
Steve Howe wrote:
Hello Bruce,
Friday, September 6, 2002, 10:58:13 PM, you wrote:
BM Well, there was a big discussion, and I did bring up the issue in early
BM August to see if I could get a resolution to it and was told no
BM conclusion could be made.
BM I suggest you read the TODO
could you please make a complete table of all
possible situations and the expected returns? With complete I mean
including all combinations of rules, triggers, deferred constraints and
the like. Or do you at least see now where in the discussion we got
stuck?
Imho only view rules (==
Hello Jan,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 11:26:20 AM, you wrote:
JW Steve Howe wrote:
Hello Bruce,
Friday, September 6, 2002, 9:52:18 PM, you wrote:
BM I am not any happier about it than you are. Your report is good because
BM it is the first case where returning the wrong value
Hello Jan,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 11:26:20 AM, you wrote:
JW Seems you at least realized how serious it is. Even if you cannot code
JW the proper solution, could you please make a complete table of all
JW possible situations and the expected returns? With complete I mean
JW including all
Hello Jan,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 11:15:47 AM, you wrote:
JW Steve Howe wrote:
Hello all,
PostgreSQL *still* has a bug where PQcmdStatus() won't return the
number of rows updated. But that is essential for applications, since
without it of course we don't know if the
existed, had a brief discussion on the subject, and couldn't reach an
agreement. That's ok for me, I understand... but releasing versions
known to be broken is something I can't understand.
-9' the postmaster
If we didn't do that, then Postgresql never would have been released in
the first
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Steve Howe wrote:
JW Steve Howe wrote:
Hello all,
PostgreSQL *still* has a bug where PQcmdStatus() won't return the
number of rows updated. But that is essential for applications, since
without it of course we don't know if the updates/delete/insert
commands
-Original Message-
From: Rod Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 10:55 AM
To: Steve Howe
Cc: PostgreSQL-development
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue
existed, had a brief discussion on the subject, and
couldn't reach
On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 11:30:52AM -0700, Dann Corbit wrote:
All kidding aside, I would like to see increased emphasis on stability
and correctness. But I will admit that it is a lot less fun than adding
new features.
But in fairness, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a set of
On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 11:30:52AM -0700, Dann Corbit wrote:
I suspect it'll be several more major releases before we
begin to consider it approaching completely functional.
I believe that the surprise is at the focus, when it comes to a release.
With commercial products (anyway) if
If we didn't do that, then Postgresql never would have been
released in the first place, nor any date between then and now.
I believe that the surprise is at the focus, when it comes to a release.
With commercial products (anyway) if you have any sort of show-stopper
bug (crashing,
-Original Message-
From: Ross J. Reedstrom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 12:26 PM
To: Dann Corbit
Cc: Rod Taylor; Steve Howe; PostgreSQL-development
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue
On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 11:30:52AM
Steve Howe wrote:
Hello Jan,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 11:15:47 AM, you wrote:
JW So please, proper behavior is not allways what your favorite tool
JW expects. And just because you cannot fix your tool doesn't make that
JW behavior any more proper.
Do you have any word more
Hello Jan,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 4:56:04 PM, you wrote:
JW Steve Howe wrote:
Hello Jan,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 11:15:47 AM, you wrote:
JW So please, proper behavior is not allways what your favorite tool
JW expects. And just because you cannot fix your tool doesn't make that
Actually, this problem is part of a whole scope of problems that were in
the Berkeley code, because rules, and inheritance, just have a certain
contorting effect on SQL queries where it is difficult to get them
working properly.
If these features didn't come from Berkeley, I doubt we would have
Jan Wieck wrote:
We should surely keep this on a much more technical level and avoid any
personal offendings. To do so, please explain to me why you think that
triggers and constraints are out of focus here? What is the difference
between a trigger, a rule and an instead rule from a business
Steve Howe wrote:
Because the affected commands are supposed to give you back
information on what your INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE commands, not what is
making behind the scenes.
And it seems that other people in the thread agree with me, please
read thread.
Since you are probably very
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Jan Wieck wrote:
We should surely keep this on a much more technical level and avoid any
personal offendings. To do so, please explain to me why you think that
triggers and constraints are out of focus here? What is the difference
between a
On Mon, 2002-09-09 at 22:11, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Jan Wieck wrote:
We should surely keep this on a much more technical level and avoid any
personal offendings. To do so, please explain to me why you think that
triggers and constraints are out of focus here? What is the difference
between
Hello Bruce,
Monday, September 9, 2002, 11:13:20 PM, you wrote:
BM Steve Howe wrote:
Because the affected commands are supposed to give you back
information on what your INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE commands, not what is
making behind the scenes.
And it seems that other people in the thread agree
Tom Lane wrote:
Steve Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BM I suggest you read the TODO detail on the item and make a proposal on
BM how it _should_ work and if you can get agreement from everyone, you may
BM be able to nag someone into doing a patch.
I think it should return the number of
Hello Tom,
Saturday, September 7, 2002, 5:42:33 PM, you wrote:
TL Steve Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BM I suggest you read the TODO detail on the item and make a proposal on
BM how it _should_ work and if you can get agreement from everyone, you may
BM be able to nag someone into doing a
Hello all,
PostgreSQL *still* has a bug where PQcmdStatus() won't return the
number of rows updated. But that is essential for applications, since
without it of course we don't know if the updates/delete/insert
commands succeded. Even worst, on interfaces like Delphi/dbExpress the
program will
Steve Howe wrote:
Hello all,
PostgreSQL *still* has a bug where PQcmdStatus() won't return the
number of rows updated. But that is essential for applications, since
without it of course we don't know if the updates/delete/insert
commands succeded. Even worst, on interfaces like
Hello Bruce,
Friday, September 6, 2002, 3:22:13 PM, you wrote:
BM Steve Howe wrote:
Hello all,
PostgreSQL *still* has a bug where PQcmdStatus() won't return the
number of rows updated. But that is essential for applications, since
without it of course we don't know if the
I am not any happier about it than you are. Your report is good because
it is the first case where returning the wrong value actually breaks
software. You may be able to justify adding a fix during beta by saying
it is a bug fix.
Of course, someone is going to have to generate a patch and
Hello Bruce,
Friday, September 6, 2002, 9:52:18 PM, you wrote:
BM I am not any happier about it than you are. Your report is good because
BM it is the first case where returning the wrong value actually breaks
BM software. You may be able to justify adding a fix during beta by saying
BM it
Hello Bruce,
Friday, September 6, 2002, 10:58:13 PM, you wrote:
BM Well, there was a big discussion, and I did bring up the issue in early
BM August to see if I could get a resolution to it and was told no
BM conclusion could be made.
BM I suggest you read the TODO detail on the item and make
38 matches
Mail list logo
