Re: MERGE ... RETURNING

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>, Isaac Morland <isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: MERGE ... RETURNING
Date: 2023-07-12 00:43:14
Message-ID: a59e5251f2123aa38f4d299f370a6bff7b4a4938.camel@j-davis.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, 2023-01-22 at 19:58 +0100, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> (We do have to keep our fingers
> crossed that they will decide to use the same RETURNING syntax as we
> do
> in this patch, of course.)

Do we have a reason to think that they will accept something similar?

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2023-07-12 01:37:22 Re: [PoC] Federated Authn/z with OAUTHBEARER
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2023-07-12 00:38:41 Re: 'ERROR: attempted to update invisible tuple' from 'ALTER INDEX ... ATTACH PARTITION' on parent index