| From: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE |
| Date: | 2014-01-11 06:01:02 |
| Message-ID: | CAM-w4HOkVWDE_6907nL-HTHaZR2tze57WLSF3Vy8CwHhaGQRZg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 12:51 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 4:09 PM, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> wrote:
>> Well, the usual example for exclusion constraints is resource scheduling
>> (ie: scheduling what room a class will be held in). In that context is it
>> hard to believe that you might want to MERGE a set of new classroom
>> assignments in?
>
> So you schedule a class that clashes with 3 other classes, and you
> want to update all 3 rows/classes with details from your one row
> proposed for insertion?
Well, perhaps you want to mark the events as conflicting with your new event?
--
greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2014-01-11 06:08:38 | Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2014-01-11 04:47:07 | Re: [PATCH] Store Extension Options |