Re: SQL:2011 PERIODS vs Postgres Ranges?

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Paul A Jungwirth <pj(at)illuminatedcomputing(dot)com>
Cc: Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)protonmail(dot)com>, Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar(dot)ahmad(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SQL:2011 PERIODS vs Postgres Ranges?
Date: 2020-09-17 07:51:01
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 04:27:53PM -0700, Paul A Jungwirth wrote:
> Here is a patch rebasing on master (meant to be applied on top of my
> other multirange patch) and newly including UPDATE/DELETE FOR PORTION
> OF. FOR PORTION OF works on any table with a temporal primary key. It
> restricts the UPDATE/DELETE to the given time frame, and then if the
> affected row(s) had any "leftovers" above or below the targeted range,
> it INSERTs new rows to preserve the untouched intervals.

This patch had no reviews, unfortunately it cannot be applied
cleanly. Could you send a rebase please?

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message yuzuko 2020-09-17 08:12:36 Re: Autovacuum on partitioned table (autoanalyze)
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2020-09-17 07:45:56 Re: BUG #15858: could not stat file - over 4GB