From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Geoff Winkless <pgsqladmin(at)geoff(dot)dj>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE with _any_ constraint |
Date: | 2015-05-21 19:35:27 |
Message-ID: | 20150521193527.GV26667@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Simon Riggs (simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> On 21 May 2015 at 14:25, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> > > If the update is the same no matter which constraint is violated, why
> > would
> > > I need to specify the constraint? We're forcing the developer to make an
> > > arbitrary choice between two constraints.
> >
> > Why would the update be the same, though?
>
> *If* is the keyword there.
Agreed.
> > We will see many people ask why they have to specify constraints
> > explicitly.
> >
> > I'm not sure that we will, actually, but as I said, go ahead and
> > propose removing the restriction if you think it's important (maybe
> > start a thread on it).
> >
>
> I am. I have. Many times. What is wrong with this thread or all of the
> other times I said it?
>
> Please look at the $SUBJECT of this thread. We're here now.
I've also asked for this.
Thanks!
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Meskes | 2015-05-21 19:42:04 | Re: Problems with question marks in operators (JDBC, ECPG, ...) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-05-21 19:34:00 | Re: Fix misaligned access of ItemPointerData on ARM |