Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Anssi Kääriäinen <anssi(dot)kaariainen(at)thl(dot)fi>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}
Date: 2014-12-17 22:19:59
Message-ID: 5492018F.10903@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12/17/2014 01:12 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> 3. Why is the specification required with ON CONFLICT UPDATE, but not
> with ON CONFLICT IGNORE?

Well, UPDATE has to know which row to lock, no? IGNORE does not.

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2014-12-17 23:02:19 Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}
Previous Message Tom Lane 2014-12-17 22:04:00 Re: inherit support for foreign tables