Re: Minor ON CONFLICT related fixes
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Minor ON CONFLICT related fixes |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20150512021124.GV12950@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Minor ON CONFLICT related fixes (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Minor ON CONFLICT related fixes
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
HI, Don't have time to go through this in depth. On 2015-05-11 18:53:22 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > Note that the patch proposes to de-support CREATE RULE with an > alternative action involving ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE. Such a rule seems > particularly questionable to me, and I'm pretty sure it was understood > that only ON CONFLICT DO NOTHING should be supported as an action for > a rule (recall that INSERT statements with ON CONFLICT can, in > general, never target relations with rules). At least, I believe > Heikki said that. > Deparsing with an inference clause is now correctly supported. However, > user-defined rules with ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE are now formally > disallowed/unsupported. It seemed there would be significant complexity > involved in making this work correctly with the EXCLUDED.* > pseudo-relation, which was not deemed worthwhile. Such a user-defined > rule seems very questionable anyway. Do I understand correctly that you cut this out because there essentially was a ruleutils bug with with EXCLUDED? If so, I don't find that acceptable. I'm pretty strictly convincded that independent of rule support, we shouldn't add things to insert queries that get_query_def can't deparse. Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: