| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE/IGNORE 4.0 |
| Date: | 2015-05-08 18:06:36 |
| Message-ID: | 20150508180636.GR12950@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-05-08 20:37:15 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Why does INSERT ON CONFLICT pay attention to indcheckxmin? Uniqueness check
> only cares about the most recent committed version of the tuple, and the
> index good for that use immediately. If there was a problem there, the
> uniqueness check in a normal insert have the same problem.
Yea, that's a good angle to view this from. That'd not be the case, I
think, if we'd allow this to be used on system relations. But since
neither creating an index on system relations, nor using INSERT ON
CONFLICT on them is supported...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2015-05-08 18:10:00 | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE/IGNORE 4.0 |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2015-05-08 17:37:42 | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE/IGNORE 4.0 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2015-05-08 18:10:00 | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE/IGNORE 4.0 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-05-08 18:02:13 | Re: ALTER SYSTEM and ParseConfigFile() |