Re: GSOC13 proposal - extend RETURNING syntax

From: Karol Trzcionka <karlikt(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: GSOC13 proposal - extend RETURNING syntax
Date: 2013-05-02 17:53:46
Message-ID: 5182A82A.8060001@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

W dniu 02.05.2013 19:40, Tom Lane pisze:
>> BEFORE/AFTER seems more logical to me.
> Works for me.
>
What do you think about function- or cast-like syntax. I mean:
RETURNING OLD(foo.bar)
or RETURNING OLD(foo).bar
or RETURNING (foo::OLD).bar ?
I think none of them should conflict with any other statements.
Regards,
Karol Trzcionka

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabien COELHO 2013-05-02 17:59:40 [PATCH] add long options to pgbench (submission 1)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2013-05-02 17:40:59 Re: GSOC13 proposal - extend RETURNING syntax