Re: Support UPDATE table SET(*)=...

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, Atri Sharma <atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Support UPDATE table SET(*)=...
Date: 2015-04-08 16:37:29
Message-ID: 8746.1428511049@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Andrew Gierth wrote:
> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>>> Tom> Right, but we should be trying to move in that direction. I see
>>> Tom> your point though that (*) is more notationally consistent with
>>> Tom> that case. Maybe we should be looking at trying to implement T641
>>> Tom> in full and then including (*) as a special case of that.

>> I would have liked to have done that, but that would have raised the
>> complexity of the project from "Atri can take a stab at this one with
>> negligible supervision" to "Andrew will have to spend more time than he
>> has conveniently available staring at the raw parser to try and make it
>> work".

Well, we've never considered implementation convenience to be more
important than getting it right, and this doesn't seem like a place
to start.

(FWIW, the raw-parser changes would be a negligible fraction of the work
involved to do it like that.)

> Not to mention that, at this stage, we should be looking at reducing the
> scope of patches in commitfest rather than enlarge it.

I already took it out of the current commitfest ;-).

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2015-04-08 17:11:16 Re: Precedence of NOT LIKE, NOT BETWEEN, etc
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2015-04-08 16:33:15 Re: Support UPDATE table SET(*)=...