From: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Writeable CTEs and empty relations |
Date: | 2010-02-11 17:35:18 |
Message-ID: | 8a2b9358757e9e665093b7b006b097bc@cs.helsinki.fi |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:28:28 +0200, I wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:53:22 -0500, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Marko Tiikkaja
>> <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> wrote:
>>> On 2010-02-11 03:44 +0200, I wrote:
>>>> I'm going to have to disappoint a bunch of people and give up. :-(
>>>
>>> Btw. would it make sense to apply the WITH-on-top-of-DML part of this
>>> patch? At least to me, this seems useful because you can write a
>>> RECURSIVE SELECT and then use UPDATE .. FROM or DELETE .. USING on that
>>> CTE.
>>
>> Hmm, that's a thought. Can you split out just that part?
>
> Here's the patch. It's the same as the stuff in writeable CTE patches,
but
> I added regression tests.
Whoops. The reference section in docs still had some traces of writeable
CTEs. Updated patch attached.
Regards,
Marko Tiikkaja
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
with_on_dml2.patch | text/plain | 14.6 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alexey Klyukin | 2010-02-11 17:36:00 | Re: a common place for pl/perlu modules |
Previous Message | Aidan Van Dyk | 2010-02-11 17:31:54 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make standby server continuously retry restoring the next WAL |