Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>
From: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>, Anssi Kääriäinen <anssi.kaariainen@thl.fi>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2014-12-20T10:16:47Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 05:32:43PM -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > Most people would list the columns, but if there is a really bizarre > > constraint, with non-default opclasses, or an exclusion constraint, it's > > probably been given a name that you could use. > > What I find curious about the opclass thing is: when do you ever have > an opclass that has a different idea of equality than the default > opclass for the type? In other words, when is B-Tree strategy number 3 > not actually '=' in practice, for *any* B-Tree opclass? Certainly, it > doesn't appear to be the case that it isn't so with any shipped > opclasses - the shipped non-default B-Tree opclasses only serve to > provide alternative notions of sort order, and never "equals". Well, in theory you could build a case insensetive index on a text column. You could argue that the column should have been defined as citext in the first place, but it might not for various reasons. Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > He who writes carelessly confesses thereby at the very outset that he does > not attach much importance to his own thoughts. -- Arthur Schopenhauer
Commits
-
Change the way we mark tuples as frozen.
- 37484ad2aace 9.4.0 cited
-
Add documentation for data-modifying statements in WITH clauses.
- 0ef0b3020402 9.1.0 cited