Re: UPSERT wiki page, and SQL MERGE syntax
| От | Peter Geoghegan |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: UPSERT wiki page, and SQL MERGE syntax |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAM3SWZSfsEaLUSf-v61_EyyHrbO42eOb6XiZ7s4CTNQ1vNBPnQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: UPSERT wiki page, and SQL MERGE syntax (Marti Raudsepp <marti@juffo.org>) |
| Ответы |
Re: UPSERT wiki page, and SQL MERGE syntax
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Marti Raudsepp <marti@juffo.org> wrote: > Only in case the trigger changes *key* columns necessary for atomicity > (i.e. from the WITHIN index). Other columns are fair game. The > restriction seems justifiable to me: it's unreasonable to be atomic > with respect to values that change mid-way. > If you don't see any reasons why it can't be done, these benefits seem > clear to me. I think the tradeoffs at least warrant wider discussion. I don't. That's very surprising. One day, it will fail unexpectedly. As proposed, the way BEFORE INSERT triggers fire almost forces users to consider the issues up-front. Note that the CONFLICTING() behavior with respect to BEFORE INSERT triggers work's the same as MySQL's "INSERT ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE foo = VALUES(foo)" thing. There was agreement that that was the right behavior, it seemed. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: