On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 11:35 PM, P. Christeas <x...@linux.gr> wrote:
> On Sunday 21 October 2012, Vik Reykja wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen > <a...@2ndquadrant.com>wrote: > > > Note: "INSERT … RETURNING" doesn't accept an ORDER BY clause. > > > > Would anyone be opposed to somebody - say, me - writing a patch to allow > > that? It would take me a lot longer than an experienced hacker to do it, > > but I'm willing to try. > > > I would oppose, for one. > > Please, don't waste your time. Reordering the INSERT .. RETURNING results > is > already possible today, with some nested syntax. At the same time, bloating > the INSERT syntax with SELECT semantics would be negative IMO. And I would > see > little use in having such a feature. > I wasn't thinking of bloating InsertStmt but returning_clause. There's no reason UpdateStmt and DeleteStmt shouldn't benefit also. But I'll hold off for now.
