Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT syntax issues
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT syntax issues |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAM3SWZTa2OAUmUQbK39SKDYMQyX_yhjFrPTPA262=6OjX3erzA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT syntax issues (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT syntax issues
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote: > Ok, that makes sense.. So is the concern that an INSERT would end up > getting default values while an UPDATE would preserve whatever's there? > > I don't see that as an issue. I think it easily could be. > Are you still against having a way to say "go forth and update whatever > non-conflicting columns I've specified in the INSERT, if there is a > conflict"..? > > Again, not saying it has to be done now, but it'd certainly be nice if > we had it initially because otherwise the ORMs and "frameworks" of the > world will be stuck supporting the more verbose approach for as long as > we support it (~5 years..). The more verbose approach is entirely necessary much of the time. For example: insert into upsert_race_test (index, count) values ('541','-1') on conflict update set count=TARGET.count + EXCLUDED.count; Merging like this will be a very common requirement. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: