Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}
От | Martijn van Oosterhout |
---|---|
Тема | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE} |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20141220101646.GA7606@svana.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE} (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 05:32:43PM -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > Most people would list the columns, but if there is a really bizarre > > constraint, with non-default opclasses, or an exclusion constraint, it's > > probably been given a name that you could use. > > What I find curious about the opclass thing is: when do you ever have > an opclass that has a different idea of equality than the default > opclass for the type? In other words, when is B-Tree strategy number 3 > not actually '=' in practice, for *any* B-Tree opclass? Certainly, it > doesn't appear to be the case that it isn't so with any shipped > opclasses - the shipped non-default B-Tree opclasses only serve to > provide alternative notions of sort order, and never "equals". Well, in theory you could build a case insensetive index on a text column. You could argue that the column should have been defined as citext in the first place, but it might not for various reasons. Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > He who writes carelessly confesses thereby at the very outset that he does > not attach much importance to his own thoughts. -- Arthur Schopenhauer
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: