Re: Review of Writeable CTE Patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Takahiro Itagaki
Subject Re: Review of Writeable CTE Patch
Date
Msg-id 20100203180432.9265.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Review of Writeable CTE Patch  (Marko Tiikkaja <marko.tiikkaja@cs.helsinki.fi>)
Responses Re: Review of Writeable CTE Patch
Re: Review of Writeable CTE Patch
List pgsql-hackers
Marko Tiikkaja <marko.tiikkaja@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:

> Here's an updated patch.  This includes the fix mentioned earlier, some
> comment improvements and making CopySnapshot() static again.  I also
> changed all references to this feature to "DML WITH" for consistency.
> I'm not sure if we want to keep it, but it should now be easier to
> change in the future.

Hi, I'm reviewing the writable CTE patch. The code logic seems to be
pretty good, but I have a couple of comments about error cases:

* Did we have a consensus about user-visible "DML WITH" messages? The term is used in error messages in many places,
forexample:  "DML WITH without RETURNING is only allowed inside an unreferenced CTE" Since we don't use "DML WITH" nor
"CTE"in documentation, I'd like to avoid such technical acronyms in logs if we had better names, or we should have a
sectionto explain them in docs.
 

* What can I do to get "Recursive DML WITH statements are not supported" message? I get syntax errors before I get the
messagebecause We don't support UNIONs with RETURNING queries. Am I missing something?
 
   =# UPDATE tbl SET i = i + 1 WHERE i = 1      UNION ALL      UPDATE tbl SET i = i + 1 WHERE i = 2;   ERROR:  syntax
errorat or near "UNION"
 

* The patch includes regression tests, but no error cases in it. More test cases are needed for stupid queries.

Regards,
---
Takahiro Itagaki
NTT Open Source Software Center




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Streaming replication and message type header
Next
From: Marko Tiikkaja
Date:
Subject: Re: Review of Writeable CTE Patch