Re: MERGE vs REPLACE

* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Normally I'd plump for following the standard ... but AFAIR, we have had
> bucketloads of requests for REPLACE functionality, and not one request
> for spec-compatible MERGE. If, as it appears, full-spec MERGE is also a
> whole lot harder and slower than REPLACE, it seems that we could do
> worse than to concentrate on doing REPLACE for now. (We can always come
> back to MERGE some other day.)

Not to be too much of a pain, but I asked for full-spec MERGE a while
back... :) I don't think I was the only one asking for full-spec MERGE
in the "What features would you like to see in Postgres?" thread a while
ago either, though I could be wrong.

I'd like to see MySQL-like 'replace' too, of course. :)

Thanks,

Stephen