Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1sCmou-0085jy-Oc for pgsql-general@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 30 May 2024 20:56:22 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1sCmou-005z2e-AC for pgsql-general@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 30 May 2024 20:56:20 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1sCmot-005z2W-VC for pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 30 May 2024 20:56:19 +0000 Received: from mail-oo1-xc29.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::c29]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1sCmor-002ilr-Oq for pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 30 May 2024 20:56:18 +0000 Received: by mail-oo1-xc29.google.com with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-5b970a97e8eso776770eaf.1 for ; Thu, 30 May 2024 13:56:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1717102577; x=1717707377; darn=lists.postgresql.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Lq+526eVzSVJhKAsYp5Jj463Jub/mfeQp0gfB63Bw2U=; b=AOARL83g4EteZAZ0ZKmcZTtmNRPy9TcCDutRWiEITxlv886kyIxF+EZTgrp7vcOCy8 7N2mJBm5l3oklMPKVSSHYBA6QKc65VzuyxFVFg06GIiF79kLqZ/Sa4eaS+5+spWQDmab I/JGvrwELxaxrU/3ZHhf//JLwv8qDLSAm16JGfXKDmhb5g1GGRew/VcWZo31B2kKEqPr ubaCjQ559jZ0v7H0tfOZRGSkDBgVJYiwiNO+UzFVlf8kv4rVZwMG2dCfx8thsESGyVVg Jzde90a7LEPI6FbqAdb4GRzvbBpoCXxAeZXbwO51gBO1v4Aan99pNy1FoeHwH1Tc3jkP gTDQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1717102577; x=1717707377; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=Lq+526eVzSVJhKAsYp5Jj463Jub/mfeQp0gfB63Bw2U=; b=LdfzOtaAfv7gu/7kBYU+7fkJPrxEtxsKgVtzm5tNdhw6O2cw+NX3u7sQ2ejllKvj0t H5SP//mm6YvUAJH0jr3qKJKqHAh+FsyzM6YmqtS9kbLxm1HiDfRmjXRuJo+uZkJj40m5 XOUW1imRa+K0ewcZoPwgZS2qUQtaRV75CDQr+9qpxkrVYkh6SIZMCeJZpc89GVJeCrTS 8BUtqBe4NF5gyMZ2Y6dZOyQjIZBa2KlmUyTyh1BWj3vBzbfO2H7JgnJBSlFAReW1MZOt oMEjTsiV47JCwQo9MhJfxSZXSNLJNiXNJOsK68DgSxSARIlny3aZD7192ItiHNzoCl3p oLTg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwW9knixRDTZA4HXlAMtV4W0jTPI6X+7F8Khs/cpgqUz+ebBANu LW8isO4iEQeVuyCKfkuZcxYzwnCBjmKQHhIENMzIUPjTNKN2TgGfP38Iow7ElWZTQgG2qDR32q1 s7vyR2hBpxnKdYGJuvrywRkyFARY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFL96Qj5MDXaI/DD2Qwie1qa8Pwan2epI0p0DKtBiI90GbyUu5fym+VvpCjOEf7u3sLPPxAVdSzCyquzjCQrj8= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6820:1aca:b0:5b2:bc0:f387 with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-5ba05d3212amr7598eaf.5.1717102576796; Thu, 30 May 2024 13:56:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: "David G. Johnston" Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 14:56:06 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Rules and Command Status - update/insert/delete rule with series of commands in action To: johnlumby@hotmail.com Cc: pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000220ade0619b21911" List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk --000000000000220ade0619b21911 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, May 30, 2024, 12:32 johnlumby@hotmail.com wrote: > Any thoughts? > Very little interest exists in working on user-specified rules. They are practically deprecated. > > Any interest in perhaps providing a choice via a configuration > parameter? > Almost certainly not. Configuration should not affect query behavior. If anything is done it would have to be new syntax. Though I haven't explored the use case presented. See the first point. I sure don't have the requisite familiarity here. David J. --000000000000220ade0619b21911 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, May 30, 2024, 12:32 johnlumby@hotmail.com <johnlumby@hotmail.com> wrote:

Any thoughts?=C2=A0

Very little interest exists in working on user-specified rules.=C2=A0 The= y are practically deprecated.
=


=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Any interest in perhaps providing a choice via a configuration parameter?


Almost certainly not.=C2=A0 Configuration shou= ld not affect query behavior.=C2=A0 If anything is done it would have to be= new syntax.=C2=A0 Though I haven't explored the use case presented.=C2= =A0 See the first point.=C2=A0 I sure don't have the requisite familiar= ity here.

David J.
=

--000000000000220ade0619b21911--