| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: transition tables and UPDATE |
| Date: | 2023-02-01 09:29:59 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKGLj+TOoSomQ0DGASO474W82ysbPUMz9PUOVKcWtP_dQ-w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 10:18 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> Earlier today I gave a talk about MERGE and wanted to provide an example
> with FOR EACH STATEMENT triggers using transition tables. However, I
> can't find a non-ugly way to obtain the NEW row that corresponds to each
> OLD row ... I had to resort to an ugly trick with OFFSET n LIMIT 1.
> Can anyone suggest anything better? I couldn't find any guidance in the
> docs.
I don't know the answer, either in PostgreSQL or the SQL spec. I
wondered if there *should* be a way here:
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | shiy.fnst@fujitsu.com | 2023-02-01 09:40:41 | RE: Time delayed LR (WAS Re: logical replication restrictions) |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2023-02-01 09:28:14 | Re: Exit walsender before confirming remote flush in logical replication |