Re: wCTE behaviour - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David E. Wheeler
Subject Re: wCTE behaviour
Date
Msg-id 42E14D00-2530-4C6B-A3A0-113648D84D5F@kineticode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: wCTE behaviour  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: wCTE behaviour
List pgsql-hackers
On Nov 11, 2010, at 9:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:

>> I can see that, but if one can't see the result of the write, or can't determine whether or not it will be visible
inadvance, what's the point of writeable CTEs? 
>
> The writeable CTE returns a RETURNING set, which you can and should use
> in the outer query.  The thing that is being argued about here is what
> you see if you look "directly" at the target table rather than making
> use of RETURNING.  Essentially, I'm arguing that we shouldn't promise
> any particular behavior at that level, just as we don't promise that
> UPDATE updates different rows in any determinate order.

Yes, if RETURNING guarantees the execution order, then great. That was the first thing I tried to do before I realized
thatthe current CTE implementation doesn't support w. 

David



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Marko Tiikkaja
Date:
Subject: Re: wCTE behaviour
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: MULTISET and additional functions for ARRAY