On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I'd be very keen to see atomic upsert in Pg. Please Cc me on any patches
/ discussion, I'll be an eager tester.
Great. Thanks Craig.
--
Peter Geoghegan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 09:55:19PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
At a high level SQL MERGE is quite distinct from UPSERT, in that it is
a utility command that performs inserts, updates and deletes while
avoiding race conditions (e.g. unique constraint violations) on a more
or less best effort
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/21/2014 01:40 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
FWIW, I agree. MERGE is hard enough as it is, but trying to
guarentee some kind of atomicity makes it nigh on impossible.
Indeed, after reading what you wrote I think it may well be
impossible
On 07/20/2014 12:55 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
There is a *really* big
demand for UPSERT from users, not MERGE, although MERGE is certainly
useful too.
The inability to efficiently say Add this unique-keyed row, or if a row
of the same key already exists replace it atomically is a fundamental
