Re: Writeable CTEs Desgin Doc on Wiki

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Writeable CTEs Desgin Doc on Wiki
Date: 2010-08-16 18:25:50
Message-ID: AANLkTikMGU5KGTFVLJrW-QkbXAgxnXw1LRJN1T_WzgOy@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 7:44 AM, Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> We (Marko, David Fetter and I) discussed on IRC about design of
> writeable CTEs. It does and will contain not only syntax but also
> miscellaneous specifications, general rules and restrictions. I hope
> this will help the patch reviews and stop dangerous design at the
> early stage. If you find something wrong, or have request, please
> notify.
>
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/WriteableCTEs
>
> We will keep to add details. Any comments are welcome.

There are really two separate features here, and it might be worth
giving them separate names and separate designs (and separate
patches). Allowing the main query to be an insert, update, or delete
seems easier than allowing the toplevel CTEs to contain those
constructs, although I might be wrong about that.

Under features, what is DCL? There has been previous talk of allowing
WITH (COPY ...) and I am personally of the opinion that it would be
nice to be able to do WITH (EXPLAIN ...). DDL seems like a poor idea.

P.S. Call me a prude, but your choice of shorthand for
insert-update-delete may not be the best.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-08-16 18:27:21 Re: Todays git migration results
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2010-08-16 18:24:58 Return of the Solaris vacuum polling problem -- anyone remember this?