Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}
| От | Peter Geoghegan |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE} |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAM3SWZRhRRgzh717Q+6a7QaeKRLqEc405S3NgJetu0RU-F4fdg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE} (Gavin Flower <GavinFlower@archidevsys.co.nz>) |
| Ответы |
Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}
Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE} |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Gavin Flower <GavinFlower@archidevsys.co.nz> wrote: >> What I have a problem with is using the MERGE syntax to match people's >> preexisting confused ideas about what MERGE does. If we do that, it'll >> definitely bite us when we go to make what we'd be calling MERGE do >> what MERGE is actually supposed to do. I favor clearly explaining >> that. >> > Opinionated I may be, but I wanted stay well clear of the syntax minefield > in this area - as I still have at least a vestigial instinct for self > preservation! :-) To be clear: I don't think Simon is confused about this at all, which is why I'm surprised that he suggested it. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: