| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| 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: | 2017-11-02 18:49:18 |
| Message-ID: | CANP8+jJtsL3fYgiRWYB5vM9g98iFNHgBeCtPufUkgVShpEFvvg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1 November 2017 at 18:20, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> In Postgres, you can avoid duplicate violations with MERGE by using a
> higher isolation level (these days, those are turned into a
> serialization error at higher isolation levels when no duplicate is
> visible to the xact's snapshot).
So if I understand you correctly, in your view MERGE should just fail
with an ERROR if it runs concurrently with other DML?
i.e. if a race condition between the query and an INSERT runs
concurrently with another INSERT
We have no interest in making that work?
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nico Williams | 2017-11-02 18:52:39 | Re: proposal: schema variables |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2017-11-02 18:14:01 | Re: MERGE SQL Statement for PG11 |