Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@2ndquadrant.com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-01-30T15:59:32Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 10:32 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> The code is about 1200 lines and has extensive docs, comments and tests.
>
> There are no contentious infrastructure changes, so the debate around
> concurrency is probably the main one. So it looks to me like
> meaningful review has taken place, though I know Andrew and Pavan have
> also looked at it in detail.

Only design-level review, not detailed review of the code.  To be
clear, I think the design-level review was quite productive and I'm
glad it happened, but it's not a substitute for someone going over the
code in detail to look for problems.

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


Commits

  1. Add support for MERGE SQL command

  2. Add API of sorts for transition table handling in trigger.c

  3. Revert MERGE patch

  4. Fix several bugs related to ON CONFLICT's EXCLUDED pseudo relation.