From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add support for INSERT ... ON CONFLICT DO NOTHING/UPDATE. |
Date: | 2015-05-22 00:48:11 |
Message-ID: | 20150522004811.GD2028@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-05-21 20:28:41 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> That said, I'm not sure about having it be the same, either: first, I
> don't think we need to update the fe-exec.c code at all -- I mean, all
> the things I see there are very old compatibility stuff; reporting the
> OID of the just-inserted row? Seriously, who has OIDs in user tables
> anymore? Surely we wouldn't try to do that for INSERT ON CONFLICT DO
> UPDATE at all ... if anyone wants that functionality, they can use
> RETURNING, which is far saner.
The oid currently is reported for UPSERT... I agree it's not worth much,
but it seems pointless to break it for a single command.
> As for PQcmdTuples, what would a single number returned mean? Are we
> returning the sum of both inserted and updated tuples?
Yes.
> Isn't this a bit odd?
Imo it's pretty much in line with what's done with INSTEAD OF, FDWs and
such.
> If the number is useful, then perhaps we should distinguish the cases;
> and if it's not useful, why not just return zero?
There's libraries/frameworks checking if an insert succeeded by looking
at that number, and it seems like a bad idea to needlessly break those.
So I think we're good with ripping it out. Peter?
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2015-05-22 00:51:57 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add support for INSERT ... ON CONFLICT DO NOTHING/UPDATE. |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-05-22 00:42:16 | pgsql: Back-patch libpq support for TLS versions beyond v1. |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jan Bilek | 2015-05-22 00:49:39 | Re: Postgres and TLSv1.2 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-05-22 00:45:27 | Re: Postgres and TLSv1.2 |