| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com>, Daniel Westermann <dwe(at)dbi-services(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: support for MERGE |
| Date: | 2022-01-18 10:38:38 |
| Message-ID: | 5982686a-de41-0007-3de6-2331a87a2bb4@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 13.01.22 13:43, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Apologies, there was a merge failure and I failed to notice. Here's the
> correct patch.
I looked through this a bit. I wonder why there is a check for
"unreachable WHEN clause". I don't see this in the SQL standard.
On the other hand, there is a requirement in the SQL standard that the
correlation names exposed by the source and target tables are different.
This is currently caught indirectly with a message like
ERROR: table name "t" specified more than once
because of the way everything ends up in a join tree. But that seems
implementation-dependent, and a more explicit check might be better.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Takashi Menjo | 2022-01-18 10:58:35 | Re: Map WAL segment files on PMEM as WAL buffers |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2022-01-18 10:33:19 | Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication |