X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 809529FB2DB for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 22:30:43 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 98799-03 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 22:30:27 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from kenobi.snowman.net (kenobi.snowman.net [70.84.9.186]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 112A69FAE4E for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 22:30:28 -0300 (ADT) Received: by kenobi.snowman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EC6AC58057; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 20:30:26 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 21:30:26 -0400 From: Stephen Frost To: Peter Eisentraut Cc: Andrew Dunstan , PostgreSQL-development , Susanne Ebrecht Subject: Re: 8.2 features? Message-ID: <20060714013026.GH17269@kenobi.snowman.net> Mail-Followup-To: Peter Eisentraut , Andrew Dunstan , PostgreSQL-development , Susanne Ebrecht References: <44B69778.5050104@dunslane.net> <50461.84.63.113.55.1152832991.squirrel@pezone.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="bygAmIonOAIqBxQB" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50461.84.63.113.55.1152832991.squirrel@pezone.net> X-Editor: Vim http://www.vim.org/ X-Info: http://www.snowman.net X-Operating-System: Linux/2.6.16-2-vserver-686 (i686) X-Uptime: 21:24:02 up 18 days, 15:20, 22 users, load average: 1.28, 1.20, 1.15 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200607/473 X-Sequence-Number: 86328 --bygAmIonOAIqBxQB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable * Peter Eisentraut (peter_e@gmx.net) wrote: > Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > . MERGE (at least in PK case) >=20 > I think that died after we figured out that it didn't do the sort of > UPDATE-else-INSERT thing that people wanted out of it. I agree that it's probably not going to happen for 8.2 but I certainly have uses for the SQL spec's definition of MERGE (table-level instead of the individual-tuple case). I'd like to see the individual-tuple UPSERT/REPLACE issue handled as well but I don't believe MERGE lacking that necessairly means MERGE should be ignored.. Thanks, Stephen --bygAmIonOAIqBxQB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEtvOyrzgMPqB3kigRAhQKAJ9SRtHwa9VKMOuvNGYSEzRiwZkAuACeLiTw psVpRiWfAWZ7Lz5x2cPGuyc= =Lvxi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --bygAmIonOAIqBxQB--