| From: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposing WITH ITERATIVE |
| Date: | 2020-04-29 21:54:04 |
| Message-ID: | CADUqk8XvYHbhx_k4P3skZTGUZLAM-zk=6w+RuXnjbKdZJChrhA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 4:50 PM Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> Having both WHERE and WHILE might look awkward.
>>
>
> Maybe an UNTIL instead of WHILE?
>
While I'm not a huge fan of it, one of the other databases implementing
this functionality does so using the syntax:
WITH ITERATIVE R AS '(' R0 ITERATE Ri UNTIL N (ITERATIONS | UPDATES) ')' Qf
Where N in ITERATIONS represents termination at an explicit count and, in
UPDATES, represents termination after Ri updates more than n rows on table
R.
--
Jonah H. Harris
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2020-04-29 21:55:59 | Re: xid wraparound danger due to INDEX_CLEANUP false |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2020-04-29 21:25:15 | Re: xid wraparound danger due to INDEX_CLEANUP false |