Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Yv7G4-00022w-Ph for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 20 May 2015 16:54:16 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Yv7G4-0004sH-97 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 20 May 2015 16:54:16 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Yv7G2-0004pt-J4 for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Wed, 20 May 2015 16:54:14 +0000 Received: from mail.anarazel.de ([217.115.131.40]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1Yv7Fz-0007NJ-P9 for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Wed, 20 May 2015 16:54:13 +0000 Received: from intern.anarazel.de (unknown [184.23.178.130]) (Authenticated sender: andres@anarazel.de) by mail.anarazel.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5F2FC860001; Wed, 20 May 2015 18:54:09 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 18:54:06 +0200 From: Andres Freund To: Thom Brown Cc: Peter Geoghegan , hlinnaka , Jeff Janes , Stephen Frost , Dean Rasheed , Bruce Momjian , Pg Hackers Subject: Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE/IGNORE 4.0 Message-ID: <20150520165406.GD27868@alap3.anarazel.de> References: <20150508150340.GJ12950@alap3.anarazel.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org On 2015-05-20 17:44:05 +0100, Thom Brown wrote: > On 8 May 2015 at 16:03, Andres Freund wrote: > > So I've committed the patch yesterday evening. I'm pretty sure there'll > > be some more minor things to change. But overall I feel good about the > > current state. > > > > It'd be quite helpful if others could read the docs, specifically for > > insert, and comment whether they're understandable. I've spent a fair > > amount of time trying to make them somewhat simpler, but I do think I > > only succeeded partially. And there's also my own brand of english to > > consider ;) > > The docs say "Note that exclusion constraints are not supported with > ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE." > > But I get the following error message text: > > "ERROR: there is no unique or exclusion constraint matching the ON > CONFLICT specification" > > This implies that an exclusion constraint is valid in the statement, > which contradicts the docs. Which one is correct? ON CONFLICT can be used for ... DO NOTHING as well. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers