| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT syntax issues |
| Date: | 2015-04-27 20:19:12 |
| Message-ID: | 553E99C0.10704@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/25/15 2:05 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Note that the syntax is quite similar to the SQLite
> syntax of the same feature, that has ON CONFLICT IGNORE (it also has
> ON CONFLICT REPLACE, but not ON CONFLICT UPDATE).
I don't know anything about SQLite's syntax, but from the online syntax
diagrams
https://www.sqlite.org/lang_insert.html
https://www.sqlite.org/syntax/conflict-clause.html
it appears that they are using quite a different syntax. The ON
CONFLICT clause is attached to a constraint, specifying the default
action for that constraint. The INSERT command can then override this
default choice. I think.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2015-04-27 20:48:58 | Re: Temporal extensions |
| Previous Message | David Steele | 2015-04-27 18:22:36 | Re: Proposal: knowing detail of config files via SQL |