David Fetter wrote: > On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 09:38:30PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > David Fetter wrote: > > > On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 01:29:50PM -0700, Richard Broersma wrote: > > > > This might be a premature question considering write-able CTEs > > > > are not in core, but... > > > > > > > > I wondering if write-able CTE's will be the silver bullet that > > > > will make rule based update-able views based multiple vertically > > > > partitioned table robust. By robust, I mean to elimination the > > > > update anomalies that can occur from the view point client side > > > > optimistic locking where the virtual row appears to be > > > > inconsistently updated. > > > > > > I'm not sure I understand. When the concurrency issues in > > > writeable CTEs get fixed, they could become a mechanism for doing > > > what you describe, but I suspect there would be significant work > > > involved in harnessing them to that task. > > > > > > They'll be pretty nice even without the automated view stuff, > > > though :) > > > > If the user wants to submit it, fine, but neither Tom nor I are > > excited about it. > > Could you clarify what you mean by, "it" in the sentence above? At > the developer meeting, we put "Writeable CTEs" as one of the > achievable 9.1 targets, and Tom encouraged me to see that the patch > gets fixed up and resubmitted for the first reviewfest, i.e. the > middle of next month. Sorry, my mistake. I thought I was commenting on the psql regression test suite. Please ignore. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@xxxxxxxxxx> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
