Re: UPSERT

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Jonathan Scher <js(at)oxado(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: UPSERT
Date: 2007-03-02 15:13:18
Message-ID: 6261.1172848398@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> My instinct would be to follow your first strategy, i.e. detect which
> path is needed rather than try one and then if it fails do the other.

The very first thing you need to think about is how to solve the race
condition problem, ie, two backends concurrently trying to insert
identical data. Until you have a plausible mechanism for that, the
whole thing is pie-in-the-sky.

regards, tom lane

In response to

  • Re: UPSERT at 2007-03-02 14:35:20 from Andrew Dunstan

Responses

  • Re: UPSERT at 2007-03-02 15:41:56 from Heikki Linnakangas
  • Re: UPSERT at 2007-03-04 12:55:47 from Hannu Krosing

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavan Deolasee 2007-03-02 15:32:02 Re: HOT - whats next ?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-03-02 15:08:19 Re: HOT - whats next ?