Re: MERGE ... RETURNING

Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>

From: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
To: Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>
Cc: Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet@singh.im>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2023-07-13T17:30:59Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. Add RETURNING support to MERGE.

  2. doc: Improve a couple of places in the MERGE docs.

  3. doc: improve description of privileges for MERGE and update glossary.

  4. Fix RLS policy usage in MERGE.

  5. Fix leak of LLVM "fatal-on-oom" section counter.

  6. Implement outer-level aggregates to conform to the SQL spec, with

On Thu, 13 Jul 2023 at 17:43, Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org> wrote:
>
> There is also the WITH ORDINALITY and FOR ORDINALITY examples.
>

True. I just think "number" is a friendlier, more familiar word than "ordinal".

> So perhaps pg_merge_when_clause_number() would
> > be a better name. It's still quite long, but it's the best I can think
> > of.
>
> How about pg_merge_match_number() or pg_merge_ordinality()?

I think "match_number" is problematic, because it might be a "matched"
or a "not matched" action. "when_clause" is the term used on the MERGE
doc page.

Regards,
Dean