From: | Geoff Winkless <pgsqladmin(at)geoff(dot)dj> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT IGNORE (and UPDATE) 3.0 |
Date: | 2015-04-23 14:52:40 |
Message-ID: | CAEzk6ffONob4ui_mSinUOd6OzQ1n++-3=JCpqFDtGu7phFkAFw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 23 April 2015 at 14:50, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > Maybe I'm misreading it, but isn't index_predicate meant to be inside
> the
> > brackets?
> >
> >
> http://postgres-benchmarks.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/on-conflict-docs/sql-insert.html
>
> That has changed since.
Oh, helpful. :)
I'll shut up. I have a feeling that my objection is really with the very
idea of unreserved keywords and I have a feeling that there will be rather
more people shouting me down if I go off on that particular rant; meanwhile
it's 20 years since I used yacc in earnest and it's too hazy to be able to
argue about what it is or isn't capable of.
When I set out I was really only hoping to express a preference as a user;
on balance I would really rather not have DO IGNORE, if it were possible to
avoid, because it's really ugly, but DO UPDATE/DO NOTHING I could just
about cope with (and means you don't need to add IGNORE as a keyword,
win!), although it still mildly pains me that there's an additional
unnecessary word.
But I certainly don't object enough to hold up you guys doing the actual
work for my benefit (among others, obviously!).
G
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2015-04-23 14:54:45 | Re: anole - test case sha2 fails on all branches |
Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2015-04-23 14:52:37 | Re: Freeze avoidance of very large table. |