Re: UPSERT on partition

From: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: UPSERT on partition
Date: 2015-06-25 00:51:40
Message-ID: 558B509C.2010209@lab.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Peter,

On 2015-06-25 AM 02:35, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> Inheritance with triggers is a leaky abstraction, so this kind of
> thing is always awkward. Still, UPSERT has full support for
> *inheritance* -- that just doesn't help in this case.
>

Could you clarify as to what UPSERT's support for inheritance entails?

Thanks,
Amit

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2015-06-25 01:21:58 Re: checkpointer continuous flushing
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2015-06-24 23:41:01 Re: pg_stat_*_columns?