Re: INS/UPD/DEL RETURNING for 8.2 - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Jonah H. Harris
Subject Re: INS/UPD/DEL RETURNING for 8.2
Date
Msg-id 36e682920603021747l3fea5d9ctf1012b80b6a4bae1@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: INS/UPD/DEL RETURNING for 8.2  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-patches
On 3/2/06, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
This might tie into something that was bothering me about Jonah's
first-cut patch, which was that he was introducing special cases into
places where it didn't seem real appropriate (like printtup.c).  I
wonder if we should rejigger the representation of Query so that a
FOO-RETURNING command actually *is* a SELECT in some sense, so that
there's no need for special cases.

I was thinking along the same lines.  This is Omar's patch updated to 8.2 but as I get to looking through it, there are a couple things that could be cleaned up.  I paced around a bit today trying to theorize how this could be done without a lot of changes and retaining the speed increase gained by not performing two separate operations.

I'm a bit fuzzy about how this would work exactly --- you still need to
keep track of two targetlists it seems --- but it's worth thinking
about.  I've had a bee in my bonnet for literally years about the fact
that INSERT/SELECT really needs two levels of targetlist, as does UNION.
Maybe if we thought a little bit larger we could clean up all of that
messiness at one stroke.

I'm definitely open to looking into it.  Any suggestions are always welcome. 


--
Jonah H. Harris, Database Internals Architect
EnterpriseDB Corporation
732.331.1324

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: INS/UPD/DEL RETURNING for 8.2
Next
From: "Jonah H. Harris"
Date:
Subject: Re: INS/UPD/DEL RETURNING for 8.2