Horton

Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}

Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>
To: Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Anssi Kääriäinen <anssi.kaariainen@thl.fi>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2014-12-04T18:27:47Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:04 AM, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Yes, I think that's pretty important. With a negative attno so it's
> treated as a "hidden" col that must be explicitly named to be shown and
> won't be confused with user columns.

I think that the standard for adding a new system attribute ought to
be enormous. The only case where a new one was added post-Postgres95
was "tableoid". I'm pretty sure that others aren't going to want to do
it that way. Besides, I'm not entirely convinced that this is actually
an important distinction to expose.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan

Commits

  1. Change the way we mark tuples as frozen.

  2. Add documentation for data-modifying statements in WITH clauses.