pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: MERGE SQL Statement for PG11
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2017 07:07:25 -0400
Message-ID: <20171103110725.GT4628@tamriel.snowman.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoYOyX4nyu9mbMdYTLzT9X-1RptxaTKSQfbSdpVGXgeAJQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAB7nPqRzN4bE7EfVFgt64LA8FLMCV9=VGr8=FeogVEOiUbj4Ww@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANP8+j+FPEqpd8O3scwOKUgRvtWB5r5RhcCuJ8nn6VU_wc2Nng@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAH2-Wz=AxEKE7sJEukPN3Vgu6sU5QwuLCBHuF-oJbkOLWsxTQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANP8+j+FM8ep1Cprbjaeknzq1pRAaxTMvX=hYsc4eGcj13fz7w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmoYbytQT1pZDOK6t-XD=jWffDXaHoubsU-_mqJU6W0oK0w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20171030185511.GJ4628@tamriel.snowman.net>
	<CANP8+jJopkeYT_h_u=jb6euKVnXqRc77CiOk+hSwxOC-xtP0kQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmoYKesHek379ny4HtAi-nGszj_2VrQ4uvU60qV3BNSkGFQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANP8+j+iAAvW1VqTBkW7qbq+vB8GD+xYmgQoL5tvrhO0dBcXww@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmoYOyX4nyu9mbMdYTLzT9X-1RptxaTKSQfbSdpVGXgeAJQ@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>

* Robert Haas (robertmhaas@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > We seem to have a few options for PG11
> >
> > 1. Do nothing, we reject MERGE
> >
> > 2. Implement MERGE for unique index situations only, attempting to
> > avoid errors (Simon OP)
> >
> > 3. Implement MERGE, but without attempting to avoid concurrent ERRORs (Peter)
> >
> > 4. Implement MERGE, while attempting to avoid concurrent ERRORs in
> > cases where that is possible.
> >
> > Stephen, Robert, please say which option you now believe we should pick.
> 
> I think Peter has made a good case for #3, so I lean toward that
> option.  I think #4 is too much of a non-obvious behavior difference
> between the cases where we can avoid those errors and the cases where
> we can't, and I don't see where #2 can go in the future other than #4.

Agreed.

Thanks!

Stephen

Attachments:

  signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 818B) download

view thread (265+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <20171103110725.GT4628@tamriel.snowman.net>
Permalink:  ../20171103110725.GT4628@tamriel.snowman.net/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/20171103110725.GT4628@tamriel.snowman.net

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: sfrost@snowman.net, robertmhaas@gmail.com, simon@2ndquadrant.com, pg@bowt.ie, michael.paquier@gmail.com
  Subject: Re: MERGE SQL Statement for PG11
  In-Reply-To: <20171103110725.GT4628@tamriel.snowman.net>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox