Re: Making joins involving ctid work for the benefit of UPSERT
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Making joins involving ctid work for the benefit of UPSERT |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAM3SWZQC+TNeNQv_wCtZ5jUVJQMsE+QQEPTVEOPBFL7rT=e3Lg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Making joins involving ctid work for the benefit of UPSERT (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Making joins involving ctid work for the benefit of
UPSERT
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > I don't see why you'd need such a node at all if we had a fully builtin > UPSERT. The whole stuff with ON CONFLICT SELECT FOR UPDATE and then > UPDATE ... FROM c CONFLICTS is too complicated and exposes stuff that > barely anybody will understand, let alone use correctly in queries they > write themselves. I accept that there will be a need for certain restrictions. Most obviously, if you update the target table referencing a CTE like this, not using the special CONFLICTS clause in the UPDATE (or DELETE) is an error. And as I mentioned, you may only join the projected duplicates to the UPDATE ModifyTable - an attempt to join any more relations is an error. In short, this *is* a fully built-in upsert. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: