Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 52D3A292.4010507@vmware.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/11/2014 12:40 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > My problem is that in general I'm not sold on the actual utility of > making this kind of row locking work with exclusion constraints. I'm > sincerely having a hard time thinking of a practical use-case > (although, as I've said, I want to make it work with IGNORE). Even if > you work all this row locking stuff out, and the spill-to-disk aspect > out, the interface is still wrong, because you need to figure out a > way to project more than one reject per slot. Maybe I lack imagination > around how to make that work, but there are a lot of "ifs" and "buts" > either way. Exclusion constraints can be used to implement uniqueness checks with SP-GiST or GiST indexes. For example, if you want to enforce that there are no two tuples with the same x and y coordinates, ie. use a point as the key. You could add a b-tree index just to enforce the constraint, but it's better if you don't have to. In general, it's just always better if features don't have implementation-specific limitations like this. - Heikki
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: