Re: support for MERGE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: support for MERGE
Date
Msg-id 202203171836.ewk25joolhwc@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: support for MERGE  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2022-Mar-17, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> I'll see what to do about Instrumentation->nfiltered{1,2,3} that was
> complained about by Andres upthread.  Maybe some additional macros will
> help.

This turns out not to be as simple as I expected, mostly because we want
to keep Instrumentation as a node-agnostic struct.  Things are already a
bit wonky with nfiltered/nfiltered2, and the addition of nfiltered3
makes things a lot uglier, and my impulse of using a union to separate
what is used for scans/joins vs. what is used for MERGE results in an
even more node-specific definition rather than the other way around.

Looking at the history I came across this older thread where this was
discussed
https://postgr.es/m/20180409215851.idwc75ct2bzi6tea@alvherre.pgsql
particularly this message from Robert,
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BTgmoaE3R6%3DV0G6zbht2L_LE%2BTsuYuSTPJXjLW%2B9_tpMGubZQ%40mail.gmail.com

I'll keep looking at this in the coming days, see if I can come up with
something sensible.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera           39°49'30"S 73°17'W  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
Y una voz del caos me habló y me dijo
"Sonríe y sé feliz, podría ser peor".
Y sonreí. Y fui feliz.
Y fue peor.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Joshua Brindle
Date:
Subject: Re: Granting SET and ALTER SYSTE privileges for GUCs
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication