Re: MERGE ... RETURNING

Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>

To: Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet@singh.im>, Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>

Cc: Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>

Date: 2023-07-21T18:30:22Z

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 →

Add RETURNING support to MERGE.
- c649fa24a42b 17.0 landed
doc: Improve a couple of places in the MERGE docs.
- 97d4262683ac 17.0 landed
- d4c573d8e81e 16.3 landed
- a875743ff402 15.7 landed
doc: improve description of privileges for MERGE and update glossary.
- 4bc8f29088f8 17.0 landed
- 3b6728910ace 16.2 landed
- ff772853d02e 15.6 landed
Fix RLS policy usage in MERGE.
- c2e08b04c9e7 17.0 cited
Fix leak of LLVM "fatal-on-oom" section counter.
- 4f4d73466d71 17.0 cited
Implement outer-level aggregates to conform to the SQL spec, with
- e649796f128b 7.4.1 cited

On Thu, 2023-07-20 at 23:19 -0700, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> Plus, if we were able to make it work as SQL syntax, it's very likely
> we can use the same technique to implement BEFORE and AFTER behaviour
> in UPDATE ... RETURNING that the old thread could not accomplish a
> decade ago.

To clarify, I don't think having a special table alias will require any
changes in gram.y and I don't consider it a syntactical change.

I haven't looked into the implementation yet.

Regards,
	Jeff Davis