From: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Updated INSERT/UPDATE RETURNING |
Date: | 2006-08-05 19:20:12 |
Message-ID: | 36e682920608051220x15fccbcdx81c28be90e013edf@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On 8/5/06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Huh? Why'd you remove it? I can't imagine it makes things
> significantly simpler to omit that case, and even if you can't
> think of uses for it, I can (taking jobs from a to-do queue for
> instance).
It can be added back. Dequeing is a good use-case idea though :)
> BTW, it occurs to me to wonder whether we've picked a good choice
> of syntax. I don't remember where the suggestion to use "RETURNING"
> came from (did we borrow it from another DBMS?).
Oracle. DB2 uses something similar to SELECT * FROM (UPDATE tbl SET ... );
> But AFAICS this syntax will require the introducing keyword to be a fully reserved
> word, and since RETURNING is not listed as a reserved word in the
> SQL spec, reserving it is arguably a spec violation.
True.
> The simplest alternative that comes to mind is to use RETURNS instead
> I don't have a strong feeling either way, but now is the time to
> decide.
I don't care either way, RETURNS is fine I guess.
> OK, but we need a final version soon.
Sure thing.
--
Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1300
EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301
33 Wood Ave S, 2nd Floor | jharris(at)enterprisedb(dot)com
Iselin, New Jersey 08830 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2006-08-05 20:00:24 | Re: TODO system WAS: 8.2 features status |
Previous Message | Michael Meskes | 2006-08-05 18:01:37 | Re: ecpg test suite |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-05 20:38:04 | Re: Updated INSERT/UPDATE RETURNING |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-05 17:43:32 | Re: Updated INSERT/UPDATE RETURNING |