On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 16:48 +0200, hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote: > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 04:06:34PM +0200, Rafal Pietrak wrote: > > Hi all, > > first of all - why did you send this mail as reply to some 2-weeks old > thread, instead of just start of new thread? Sorry for that. Old habits... always forget that. > > > Can someone give a little explenation here ... or point me to "for > > dummies" documentation? (yes, I've been though postgres docs, to no > > avail). > > perhaps this will help: > > http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/06/15/to-rule-or-not-to-rule-that-is-the-question/ > Hmmm. not really. Yet, more puzzles are there, so may be they'll guide me to the answer, eventualy. One thing I've spotted there, is that earlier I've naively assumed, that when I define a RULE INSTEAD, the original query is "discarded" on the final rewritten query. The example found at your link shows that it isn't ... which is *extremally* strange, but somehow explains what I get in my set of rules "supposedly" exclusive. ... or may be this "theory" is also wrong :( Anyway, thenx for the link. -R -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
