| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE} |
| Date: | 2014-09-25 20:25:49 |
| Message-ID: | CA+U5nMJH=wUfwfTigPbXRw=Vn38hNNdAqY4zKny7PfseY+7GNg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 25 September 2014 19:59, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I've never been a fan of putting the index name in there.
>
> Me neither. Although I do understand Kevin's concern about the user's
> intent surrounding which unique index to merge on.
The use case cited is real. My solution of using an after trigger
works yet without adding specific functionality to this command. So we
can achieve what users want without complicating things here.
If we do decide we really want it, lets add it as a later patch.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2014-09-25 20:34:06 | Re: Review of GetUserId() Usage |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2014-09-25 20:21:17 | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE} |