Re: MERGE vs REPLACE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: MERGE vs REPLACE
Date
Msg-id 25849.1132238470@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: MERGE vs REPLACE  (Csaba Nagy <nagy@ecircle-ag.com>)
Responses Re: MERGE vs REPLACE
Re: MERGE vs REPLACE
List pgsql-hackers
Csaba Nagy <nagy@ecircle-ag.com> writes:
> OK, in this case I don't care about either MERGE or REPLACE, but for an
> UPSERT which does the locking :-)

This is exactly the point --- pretty much nobody has come to us and
asked for a feature that does what Peter and Martijn say MERGE does.
(I haven't bothered to look at the 2003 spec, I'm assuming they read it
correctly.)  What we *have* been asked for, over and over, is an
insert-or-update feature that's not so tedious and inefficient as the
savepoint-insert-rollback-update kluge.  That's what we ought to be
concentrating on providing.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: tablespaces and non-empty directories
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Optional postgres database not so optional in 8.1