Re: Transition tables vs ON CONFLICT

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Transition tables vs ON CONFLICT
Date: 2017-06-22 05:25:15
Message-ID: CAEepm=3fkpZZQezLDwcoCZfWfJaJGsnsucH+4BhXXBy35s+Uaw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 11:04 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> That accidentally removed a comment that I wanted to keep.
> Thomas> Here is a better version.
>
> I plan to commit this soon; if anyone has any comment to make, now would
> be a good time.

Here's patch #3 rebased for the recent reindent.

--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment Content-Type Size
transition-tuples-from-on-conflict-v4.patch application/octet-stream 10.7 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kuntal Ghosh 2017-06-22 05:44:57 Re: Autovacuum launcher occurs error when cancelled by SIGINT
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2017-06-22 05:24:01 Re: PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operations on the same table