| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "A(dot)M(dot)" <agentm(at)themactionfaction(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: MERGE Specification |
| Date: | 2008-04-25 03:40:22 |
| Message-ID: | 13014.1209094822@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
> Perhaps a better option would be to implement Merge per spec, and then
> implement a "replace into" command for the oltp scenario. This way you keep
> the spec behavior for the spec syntax, and have a clearly non-spec command
> for non-spec behavior.
In that case, it's a fair question to ask just who will use the "spec"
syntax. As far as I can tell from years of watching the mailing lists,
there is plenty of demand for a concurrent-safe insert-or-update
behavior, and *exactly zero* demand for the other. I challenge you to
find even one request for the "spec" behavior in the mailing list
archives. (Simon doesn't count.)
I recently came across the expression "YAGNI", and think it's probably
pretty relevant to this discussion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_Ain't_Gonna_Need_It
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2008-04-25 03:40:54 | Re: Proposed patch - psql wraps at window width |
| Previous Message | Decibel! | 2008-04-25 03:28:49 | Re: Standard metadata queries |