Re: MERGE vs REPLACE

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Jaime Casanova <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Subject: Re: MERGE vs REPLACE
Date: 2005-11-16 05:27:29
Message-ID: 437AC341.3040905@familyhealth.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> We should probably throw a notice or warning if we go to a table lock,
> too.

That's not very useful, because you can only do somethign about it AFTER
the 1 hour exclusive lock merge has already run :)

Chris

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim C. Nasby 2005-11-16 06:06:20 Re: Long-time 7.4 contrib failure Mac OS X 10.3.8
Previous Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2005-11-16 05:25:43 Re: PG_DUMP and table locking in PG7.4