From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Abhijit Menon-Sen" <ams(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Enforce that INSERT...RETURNING preserves the order of multi rows |
Date: | 2012-10-21 16:36:29 |
Message-ID: | 201210211836.33167.andres@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sunday, October 21, 2012 06:30:14 PM Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 10/21/2012 12:20 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> > At 2012-10-21 11:49:26 -0400, cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com wrote:
> >> If there is a natural sequence (e.g. - a value assigned by nextval()),
> >> that offers a natural place to apply the usual order-imposing ORDER BY
> >> that we are expected to use elsewhere.
> >
> > Note: "INSERT … RETURNING" doesn't accept an ORDER BY clause.
>
> No, but you can wrap the INSERT .. RETURNING in a CTE and order that.
Personally I find that a not very practical suggestion. It means you need the
ability to sort the data equivalently on the clientside which isn't always
easy if you consider platform/locale and whatever differences.
Suggesting nextval() doesn't strike me as very practical either because it
means that you either need a separate roundtrip to the server to get a bunch
of new ids which you then can assign to the to-be-inserted rows or you need
the ability to match the returned rows to the inserted rows somehow. Thats not
always easy.
Andres
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | P. Christeas | 2012-10-21 16:40:33 | Re: Re: [PATCH] Enforce that INSERT...RETURNING preserves the order of multi rows |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2012-10-21 16:30:14 | Re: Re: [PATCH] Enforce that INSERT...RETURNING preserves the order of multi rows |