| From: | Geoff Winkless <pgsqladmin(at)geoff(dot)dj> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE with _any_ constraint |
| Date: | 2015-05-21 21:03:26 |
| Message-ID: | CAEzk6ff1W0rmKuo1DOvX+5en8xZyZRQhwhOGY6pUKdO2sUkEfQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 21 May 2015 21:15, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> I would like to see this happen now before we get hit with usage
questions similar to OP's. If both requests cannot happen now, if we can at
least agree a path for future enhancement we can refer people to what will
happen in later releases when they ask.
FWIW as the OP I was merely asking for clarification as to why it was
required for UPDATE and not DO NOTHING.
The discussion has been enough to clarify for me: putting something along
the lines of what was discussed in this thread in the documentation
alongside the requirement would, IMO, be sufficient.
I'm not trying to suggest that I represent everyone and that the discussion
is over, but as you pointed at the OP I thought I should put in where I am
with this now.
Ta
Geoff
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Piotr Stefaniak | 2015-05-21 21:06:40 | Re: Fix misaligned access of ItemPointerData on ARM |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2015-05-21 21:02:13 | Re: GiST KNN Crasher |