From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Writeable CTEs and empty relations |
Date: | 2010-02-12 04:26:02 |
Message-ID: | 603c8f071002112026l6ce8f5fayd1c910fad66c3924@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Marko Tiikkaja
<marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:28:28 +0200, I wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:53:22 -0500, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Marko Tiikkaja
>>> <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> wrote:
>>>> On 2010-02-11 03:44 +0200, I wrote:
>>>>> I'm going to have to disappoint a bunch of people and give up. :-(
>>>>
>>>> Btw. would it make sense to apply the WITH-on-top-of-DML part of this
>>>> patch? At least to me, this seems useful because you can write a
>>>> RECURSIVE SELECT and then use UPDATE .. FROM or DELETE .. USING on that
>>>> CTE.
>>>
>>> Hmm, that's a thought. Can you split out just that part?
>>
>> Here's the patch. It's the same as the stuff in writeable CTE patches,
> but
>> I added regression tests.
>
> Whoops. The reference section in docs still had some traces of writeable
> CTEs. Updated patch attached.
This looks simple and useful. I haven't tested it, but if it's really
this easy, we should definitely do it.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-02-12 04:42:20 | Re: Patch: Remove gcc dependency in definition of inline functions |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-02-12 02:52:27 | Re: TCP keepalive support for libpq |