Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Andres Freund
Тема Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE
Дата
Msg-id 20131015172934.GP5300@awork2.anarazel.de
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 2013-10-15 10:19:17 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Well, I don't know that any of us can claim to have a lock on what the
> > syntax should look like.
> 
> Sure. But it's not just syntax. We're talking about functional
> differences too, since you're talking about mandating an update, which
> is a not the same as an "update locked row only conditionally", or a
> delete.

I think anything that only works by breaking visibility rules that way
is a nonstarter. Doing that from the C level is one thing, exposing it
this way seems a bad idea.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- Andres Freund                       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem
Следующее
От: Magnus Hagander
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem