| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: "writable CTEs" |
| Date: | 2010-12-27 21:47:14 |
| Message-ID: | 1293486434.11075.9.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On ons, 2010-12-22 at 20:44 +0200, Marko Tiikkaja wrote:
> On 2010-12-22 8:28 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > As a side note, I think the term "writable CTE" is a misnomer. The CTE
> > is not writable. The CTE is the result of a write operation.
> >
> > A writable CTE would look like this:
> >
> > WITH foo AS (SELECT ...) UPDATE foo SET ...
> >
> > a bit like an updatable view.
> >
> > AFAICT, the current patch doesn't use the term, so there is no problem,
> > but just for those who are preparing propaganda and such.
>
> I think I've used "DML WITH" in the patch, but I don't like that either.
> Naming this feature seems to be quite a challenge.
*Writing* CTEs is more accurate.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-12-27 21:52:09 | Re: 9.1alpha3 release notes help |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-12-27 21:46:32 | Re: estimating # of distinct values |