From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: MERGE vs REPLACE
Date: 2005-11-15 16:06:17
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* 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. :)



In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephan Szabo 2005-11-15 16:10:40 Re: Réf. : RE: Running PostGre on DVD
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2005-11-15 15:59:55 Re: Réf. : Re: [HACKERS] Runn