Horton

Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11

Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@2ndquadrant.com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-01-29T17:35:15Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 8:51 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 29 January 2018 at 16:44, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>
>> I think the question is how does it handle cases it doesn't support?
>> Does it give wrong answers?  Does it give a helpful error message?  Can
>> you summarize that?
>
> I'm happy to report that it gives correct answers to every known MERGE
> test, except
>
> * where it hits a concurrency issue and throws SQLCODE =
> ERRCODE_T_R_SERIALIZATION_FAILURE and the standard text for that
>
> * where it hits an unsupported feature and throws SQLCODE =
> ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED, with appropriate text

What specific features does it not work with already? A list would be helpful.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan

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.