Path: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu!spool.maxwell.syr.edu!drn.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: alfredo@ncs.es (Alfredo Novoa) Newsgroups: comp.databases.theory Subject: Re: On view updating Date: 24 Sep 2004 10:17:09 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 31 Message-ID: References: <1095685404.749627.19430@h37g2000oda.googlegroups.com> <1095761940.695979.280600@k17g2000odb.googlegroups.com> <41503008.4410312@news-read2.maxwell.syr.edu> <1095780191.753478.299130@k26g2000oda.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.103.106.78 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1096046230 4241 127.0.0.1 (24 Sep 2004 17:17:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 17:17:10 +0000 (UTC) Xref: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu comp.databases.theory:26209 "Tony Andrews" wrote in message news:<1095780191.753478.299130@k26g2000oda.googlegroups.com>... > So most views are updateable in some way or > other, subject to various restrictions. And if we don't like the way > the DBMS will implement the update for a particular view, we can > disable it. If we use the Date/McGoveran view updating rules (as I > currently see them), then I will generally not like what happens, so I > will generally disable updates on those views. IMO we could find better rules, and we could like what happens more often. > Fair enough, but not > entirely satisfying! I agree. > Somehow, to me, it doesn't quite deliver what I > expected from the claim that "most views are inherently updateable", > but then perhaps I expected too much. When people hear that views are updateable they tend to think that it means that views are updateable in all circumstances, but it does not mean that. The contrary is also true. When somebody is not able to translate any view update, he tends to think that the view is never updateable, and this is often false. Regards