From: | Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "P(dot) Christeas" <xrg(at)linux(dot)gr>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Enforce that INSERT...RETURNING preserves the order of multi rows |
Date: | 2012-10-21 09:44:38 |
Message-ID: | 20121021094438.GA27309@toroid.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
At 2012-10-17 09:56:22 -0400, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us wrote:
>
> > Clarify that in the documentation, and also write a test case
> > that will prevent us from breaking the rule in the future.
>
> I don't believe this is a good idea in the slightest. Yeah, the
> current implementation happens to act like that, but there is no
> reason that we should make it guaranteed behavior.
I always thought it *was* guaranteed, and I've encountered code written
by other people who were obviously under the same impression: take some
strings (e.g. flag names), use "insert … returning id", map the ids back
to the names, and use the values in further inserts into other tables
("flag_id foreign key references flags").
I know one could say "returning id, name", but there's certainly code
out there that doesn't do this.
I personally think the return order should be guaranteed; and if not,
then the documentation urgently needs some prominent warnings to tell
people that they should not assume this (for any variant of RETURNING).
-- Abhijit
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2012-10-21 15:02:50 | Re: Successor of MD5 authentication, let's use SCRAM |
Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2012-10-21 07:59:42 | Re: enhanced error fields |