From: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, elein <elein(at)varlena(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Adding MERGE to the TODO list (resend with subject) |
Date: | 2004-05-09 05:32:58 |
Message-ID: | 409DC28A.7010509@familyhealth.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
>>Except you can keep trying and trying without the outermost transaction
>>failing.
>
> But that won't provide the necessary next key locking you mentioned in
> your first email, will it?
No, but since I can loop an infinite number of times until either the
update or insert works, I don't need next key locking.
BTW, the reference in MySQL:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/REPLACE.html
Hmm...no refernce to next key locking. Maybe that's an Innodb thing...
Anyway, you can see how they've implemented their algorithm.
Here is docs on the DB2 merge command from which the standard was derived:
http://databasejournal.com/features/db2/article.php/10896_3322041_2
Chris
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Denis Braekhus | 2004-05-09 12:10:08 | Re: vacuumdb is failing with NUMBER OF INDEX TUPLES NOT |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2004-05-09 05:18:25 | Re: Adding MERGE to the TODO list (resend with subject) |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Page | 2004-05-09 07:38:42 | Re: Relocatable installs |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2004-05-09 05:18:25 | Re: Adding MERGE to the TODO list (resend with subject) |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Denis Braekhus | 2004-05-09 12:43:52 | Re: not really SQL but I need info on BLOBs |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2004-05-09 05:18:25 | Re: Adding MERGE to the TODO list (resend with subject) |