| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE} 2.0 |
| Date: | 2015-02-02 16:43:41 |
| Message-ID: | 54CFA93D.9080609@vmware.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/30/2015 01:38 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I have not addressed the recently described problems with exclusion
> constraints. I hope we can do so shortly. Simply removing IGNORE
> support until such time as we straighten that all out (9.6?) seems
> like the simplest solution. No need to block the progress of "UPSERT",
> since exclusion constraint support was only ever going to be useful
> for the less compelling IGNORE variant. What do other people think? Do
> you agree with my view that we should shelve IGNORE support for now,
> Heikki?
No, I don't agree. Let's fix it.
- Heikki
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2015-02-02 16:48:35 | Re: Odd behavior of updatable security barrier views on foreign tables |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2015-02-02 16:39:17 | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE} 2.0 |