From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> |
Cc: | Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Truncate if exists |
Date: | 2012-10-15 19:20:45 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYBwfg6HhHXZYg3h0oVSNOv5Q+ccjL2_4v4PZ9bGvb=Kg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Dimitri Fontaine
<dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> wrote:
> What about continuing to extend on that incredibly useful WITH syntax we
> already have:
>
> WITH target AS (
> SELECT oid::regclass AS t
> FROM pg_class c JOIN pg_namespace n ON c.relnamespace = n.oid
> WHERE pg_table_is_visible(oid)
> AND nspname = 'public' AND NOT relname ~ 'exclude-pattern'
> )
> TRUNCATE TABLE t FROM target;
I'm not exactly sure what that is supposed to do, but it doesn't seem
like an easy-to-use substitute for truncate-if-exists...
>> my view the goal ought to be to refine that mechanism to remove the
>> clunkiness and awkwardness, rather than to invent something completely
>> new.
>
> So, what do you think? Smells like empowered SQL this time, right?
I like the idea of making our SQL dialect capable of working with DDL
in more powerful ways; I'm not sold on the concrete proposal.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-10-15 19:23:13 | Re: Deprecating RULES |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-10-15 19:19:40 | Re: Deprecating RULES |