| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: MERGE SQL Statement for PG11 |
| Date: | 2017-10-30 18:17:47 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-Wz=4Nha_cMdwTVcZwD9Gt1uzXEfpKOv72vBhCAJNEGQ0kw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Please explain in detail the MERGE SQL statements that you think will
> be problematic and why.
Your proposal is totally incomplete, so I can only surmise its
behavior in certain cases, to make a guess at what the problems might
be (see my remarks on EPQ, live lock, etc). This makes it impossible
to do what you ask right now.
Besides, you haven't answered the question from my last e-mail
("What's wrong with that [set of MERGE semantics]?"), so why should I
go to further trouble? You're just not constructively engaging with me
at this point. We're going around in circles.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nico Williams | 2017-10-30 18:36:50 | Re: MERGE SQL Statement for PG11 |
| Previous Message | Dagfinn Ilmari =?utf-8?Q?Manns=C3=A5ker?= | 2017-10-30 18:12:58 | Re: Current int & float overflow checking is slow. |