Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE/IGNORE 4.0
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE/IGNORE 4.0 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 18691.1431112058@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE/IGNORE 4.0 (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE/IGNORE 4.0
Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE/IGNORE 4.0 |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> writes: > On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Ooops. But shouldn't that have failed 100% of the time in a CCA build? >> Or is the candidates list fairly noncritical? > The candidates list is absolutely critical. Oh, I was confusing CCA with RELCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE, which does something a bit different. I wonder whether we should get rid of that symbol and just drive the test in RelationClose off CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS. (Ditto for CATCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE.) Or maybe make CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS #define the other two symbols. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: