Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11
Дата
Msg-id 5333.1517244602@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11
Список pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 04:34:48PM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> ... If unfinished means it has caveats
>> that is different to unfinished meaning crappy, risky, contentious
>> etc..

> I think the question is how does it handle cases it doesn't support? 
> Does it give wrong answers?  Does it give a helpful error message?  Can
> you summarize that?

What I was reacting to was the comments just upthread that it doesn't
yet handle partitions or RLS.  Those things don't seem optional to me.
Maybe they're small additions, but if so why aren't they done already?

Also, as far as phased development goes: Simon's drawing analogies
to things like parallel query, which we all understood had to be
done over multiple dev cycles because they were too big to finish
in one cycle.  I don't think MERGE qualifies: there seems no good
reason why it can't be done, full stop, in the first release where
it appears.

            regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Konstantin Knizhnik
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Secondary index access optimizations
Следующее
От: Simon Riggs
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11