Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT syntax issues
От | Stephen Frost |
---|---|
Тема | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT syntax issues |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20150428164254.GS30322@tamriel.snowman.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT syntax issues (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT syntax issues
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
* Peter Geoghegan (pg@heroku.com) wrote: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > > On 2015-04-28 16:36:28 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: > >> I am also very sure that every time I'll write this statement I will have to > >> look into manual for the names of TARGET and EXCLUDED because they don't > >> seem intuitive to me at all (especially the EXCLUDED). > > > > Same here. I don't understand why 'CONFLICTING' would be more ambiguous > > than EXCLUDED (as Peter argued earlier). Especially given that the whole > > syntax is called ON CONFLICT. > > Because the TARGET and EXCLUDED tuples conflict with each other - > they're both conflicting. I agree with that, but how are NEW and OLD ambiguous? NEW is clearly the tuple being added, while OLD is clearly the existing tuple. Now that I think about it though, where that'd get ugly is using this command *inside* a trigger function, which I can certainly imagine people will want to do... Thanks, Stephen
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: