From: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: plpgsql.consistent_into |
Date: | 2014-07-29 22:00:51 |
Message-ID: | 53D81993.9060804@joh.to |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1/14/14, 6:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> We don't actually implement this in PG yet, except for trivial cases, but
> it will certainly happen eventually. I think your sketch above deviates
> unnecessarily from what the standard says for UPDATE. In particular
> I think it'd be better to write things like
>
> (a, b) = ROW(1, 2);
> (a, b, c) = (SELECT x, y, z FROM foo WHERE id = 42);
>
> which would exactly match what you'd write in a multiple-assignment
> UPDATE, and it has the same rejects-multiple-rows semantics too.
Just in case someone's interested: I won't be working on this for 9.5.
If someone feels like picking this patch up, be my guest.
.marko
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-07-29 23:06:18 | Re: Proposal to add a QNX 6.5 port to PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2014-07-29 21:59:20 | Re: Reminder: time to stand down from 8.4 maintenance |