From: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> |
---|---|
To: | Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Writeable CTEs Desgin Doc on Wiki |
Date: | 2010-08-17 07:42:57 |
Message-ID: | 4C6A3D81.9090406@cs.helsinki.fi |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2010-08-17 6:41 AM +0300, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
> 2010/8/17 Robert Haas<robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>> There are really two separate features here, and it might be worth
>> giving them separate names and separate designs (and separate
>> patches). Allowing the main query to be an insert, update, or delete
>> seems easier than allowing the toplevel CTEs to contain those
>> constructs, although I might be wrong about that.
>>
>> Under features, what is DCL? There has been previous talk of allowing
>> WITH (COPY ...) and I am personally of the opinion that it would be
>> nice to be able to do WITH (EXPLAIN ...). DDL seems like a poor idea.
>
> So, there are three? One for allowing the main query to be an insert,
> update, or delete, one for the main subject of writeable CTE with
> insert, update, delete and one for allowing COPY to return rows. I am
> attracted by such COPY functionality.
>
> And the first part seems easier to be committed separately. Is it
> possible to get it in by only adding syntax and little parser/planner
> modification, or more executor code?
It's not that simple, see:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-02/msg01065.php
Regards,
Marko Tiikkaja
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2010-08-17 09:06:59 | Re: Git migration timeline |
Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2010-08-17 06:16:14 | Re: Per-column collation, proof of concept |