From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Boxuan Zhai <bxzhai2010(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: MERGE Specification |
Date: | 2010-08-06 07:28:29 |
Message-ID: | 4C5BB99D.5040404@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 06/08/10 10:12, Simon Riggs wrote:
> So DO NOTHING is the default and implies silently ignoring rows. RAISE
> ERROR is the opposite.
>
> Coding for those seems very easy, its just a question of "should we do
> it?". DB2 has it; SQL:2008 does not. But then SQL:2008 followed the DB2
> introduction of AND clauses, and SQL:2011 has so far followed the DB2
> introduction of DELETE action also.
I see neither DO NOTHING or RAISE ERROR in the documentation of DB2,
Oracle, or MSSQL server.
> Given that Peter is now attending SQL Standards meetings, I would
> suggest we leave out my suggestion above, for now. We have time to raise
> this at standards meetings and influence the outcome and then follow
> later.
Ok, fair enough.
> SQL:2011 makes no mention of how MERGE should react to statement level
> triggers. MERGE is not a trigger action even. Given considerable
> confusion in this area, IMHO we should just say the MERGE does not call
> statement triggers at all, of any kind.
IMO the UPDATE/DELETE/INSERT actions should fire the respective
statement level triggers, but the MERGE itself should not.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-08-06 07:36:44 | Re: PL/pgSQL EXECUTE '..' USING with unknown |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-08-06 07:12:38 | Re: MERGE Specification |