Horton

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

Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: 2014-09-29T07:02:35Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 2014-09-29 09:51:45 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> That said, it would be handy if the syntax was closer to MERGE. Aside from
> the concurrency issues, it does the same thing, right? So how about making
> the syntax identical to MERGE, except for swapping the MERGE keyword with
> e.g. UPSERT?

I don't think that's a good idea. What most people are missing is an
*easy* way to do upsert, that's similar to the normal INSERT. Not
something with a pretty different syntax. That's why INSERT OR REPLACE
and stuff like that was well adopted.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- 
 Andres Freund	                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Commits

  1. Change the way we mark tuples as frozen.

  2. Add documentation for data-modifying statements in WITH clauses.