| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operations on the same table |
| Date: | 2017-06-22 05:24:01 |
| Message-ID: | CAEepm=0q6WMEsbcafVQHJjFjr7AV6AmDH4a9Z8mrqZGg7C7D0Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Andrew Gierth
<andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> wrote:
>>>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>
> Thomas> Thanks both for the review. New version of patch #2 attached.
>
> I'm looking to commit this soon; if anyone has any further comment now
> would be a good time to speak up.
Here's patch #2 rebased for the recent reindent.
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| transition-tuples-from-wctes-v4.patch | application/octet-stream | 26.7 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2017-06-22 05:25:15 | Re: Transition tables vs ON CONFLICT |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2017-06-22 05:22:35 | Re: transition table behavior with inheritance appears broken (was: Declarative partitioning - another take) |