Обсуждение: Re: Allow ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE to return EXCLUDED values
I’ve looked through this patch. As far as I can tell, everything looks good, working and well commented.
The only nitpick I could find is a mispelling "EXLCUDED" → "EXCLUDED" in src/test/regress/expected/returning.out:464.
A maybe bigger question, is it nice that EXCLUDED is null when no conflict occurred? I can see the logic, but I think ergonomics wise it’d be nicer to have the proposed values in EXCLUDED, no matter what happened later. Then one can check EXCLUDED.value = NEW.value to see if one’s changes were added, for example.
The only nitpick I could find is a mispelling "EXLCUDED" → "EXCLUDED" in src/test/regress/expected/returning.out:464.
A maybe bigger question, is it nice that EXCLUDED is null when no conflict occurred? I can see the logic, but I think ergonomics wise it’d be nicer to have the proposed values in EXCLUDED, no matter what happened later. Then one can check EXCLUDED.value = NEW.value to see if one’s changes were added, for example.
/Viktor
On 7 Oct 2025 at 15:43 +0200, Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>, wrote:
Rebased version attached, following 904f6a593a0.
Regards,
Dean
On Tue, 7 Oct 2025 at 14:56, Viktor Holmberg <v@viktorh.net> wrote: > > I’ve looked through this patch. As far as I can tell, everything looks good, working and well commented. > The only nitpick I could find is a mispelling "EXLCUDED" → "EXCLUDED" in src/test/regress/expected/returning.out:464. Thanks for looking. I'm also glad to see that you picked up the INSERT ... ON CONFLICT DO SELECT patch, because I think these 2 features should work well together. I'll take another look at that one, but I'm not going to have any time this week. > A maybe bigger question, is it nice that EXCLUDED is null when no conflict occurred? I can see the logic, but I think ergonomicswise it’d be nicer to have the proposed values in EXCLUDED, no matter what happened later. Then one can check EXCLUDED.value= NEW.value to see if one’s changes were added, for example. Hmm, I'm not sure. I think it would be counter-intuitive to have non-null EXCLUDED values for rows that weren't excluded, and I think it's just as easy to check what values were added either way. Regards, Dean
On 07/10/2025 23:52, Dean Rasheed wrote: > On Tue, 7 Oct 2025 at 14:56, Viktor Holmberg <v@viktorh.net> wrote: >> A maybe bigger question, is it nice that EXCLUDED is null when no conflict occurred? I can see the logic, but I thinkergonomics wise it’d be nicer to have the proposed values in EXCLUDED, no matter what happened later. Then one can checkEXCLUDED.value = NEW.value to see if one’s changes were added, for example. > Hmm, I'm not sure. I think it would be counter-intuitive to have > non-null EXCLUDED values for rows that weren't excluded, and I think > it's just as easy to check what values were added either way. Agreed. EXCLUDED should be null or even inaccessible if the row wasn't excluded. -- Vik Fearing