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: 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: 2018-02-04T21:47:28Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 12:42 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> I'm happy to quote your words.
>
> "I've acknowledged that the standard has something to
> say on this that supports your position, which has real weight."
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAH2-WzkAjSN1H-ym-sSDh%2B6EJWmEhyHdDStzXDB%2BFxt1hcKEgg%40mail.gmail.com

Immediately afterwards, in that same e-mail, I go on to say: "I'm not
asking about WHEN AND here (that was my last question) [Simon quoted
my last response to said question]. I'm asking about a subselect that
appears in the targetlist."

Even if you are right to take "I've acknowledged that the standard has
something to say on this that supports your position" as a blanket
endorsement of disallowing subselects in all 3 places, I still don't
see why this is worth even talking about. That would mean that I said
something on January 29th that I subsequently withdrew on February
1st.

-- 
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.