Re: ask for review of MERGE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Greg Smith |
---|---|
Subject | Re: ask for review of MERGE |
Date | |
Msg-id | 4CC08821.3020102@2ndquadrant.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: ask for review of MERGE (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Responses |
Re: ask for review of MERGE
Re: ask for review of MERGE |
List | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote: > I think the right way to write UPSERT is something > along the lines of: > > MERGE INTO Stock t USING (VALUES (10, 1)) s(item_id, balance) ON > s.item_id = t.item_id ... > That led in the right direction, after a bit more fiddling I was finally able to get something that does what I wanted: a single table UPSERT implemented with this MERGE implementation. Here's a log of a test session, suitable for eventual inclusion in the regression tests: CREATE TABLE Stock(item_id int UNIQUE, balance int); INSERT INTO Stock VALUES (10, 2200); INSERT INTO Stock VALUES (20, 1900); SELECT * FROM Stock ORDER BY item_id; item_id | balance ---------+--------- 10 | 2200 20 | 1900 MERGE INTO Stock tUSING (VALUES(10,100)) AS s(item_id,balance)ON s.item_id=t.item_idWHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE SET balance=t.balance+ s.balanceWHEN NOT MATCHED THEN INSERT VALUES(s.item_id,s.balance); MERGE 1 SELECT * FROM Stock ORDER BY item_id;item_id | balance ---------+--------- 10 | 2300 20 | 1900 MERGE INTO Stock tUSING (VALUES(30,2000)) AS s(item_id,balance)ON s.item_id=t.item_idWHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE SET balance=t.balance+ s.balanceWHEN NOT MATCHED THEN INSERT VALUES(s.item_id,s.balance); MERGE 1 SELECT * FROM Stock ORDER BY item_id;item_id | balance ---------+--------- 10 | 2300 20 | 1900 30 | 2000 I'm still a little uncertain as to whether any of my other examples should have worked under the spec but just didn't work here, but I'll worry about that later. Here's what the query plan looks like on a MATCH: Merge (cost=0.00..8.29 rows=1 width=22) (actual time=0.166..0.166 rows=0 loops=1) Action 1: Update When Matched Action 2: Insert When Not Mactched MainPlan: -> Nested Loop Left Join (cost=0.00..8.29 rows=1 width=22) (actual time=0.050..0.061 rows=1 loops=1) -> Values Scan on "*VALUES*" (cost=0.00..0.01 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=0.009..0.010 rows=1 loops=1) -> Index Scan using stock_item_id_key on stock t (cost=0.00..8.27 rows=1 width=14) (actual time=0.026..0.030 rows=1 loops=1) Index Cond: ("*VALUES*".column1= item_id)Total runtime: 0.370 ms And here's a miss: Merge (cost=0.00..8.29 rows=1 width=22) (actual time=0.145..0.145 rows=0 loops=1) Action 1: Update When Matched Action 2: Insert When Not Mactched MainPlan: -> Nested Loop Left Join (cost=0.00..8.29 rows=1 width=22) (actual time=0.028..0.033 rows=1 loops=1) -> Values Scan on "*VALUES*" (cost=0.00..0.01 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=0.004..0.005 rows=1 loops=1) -> Index Scan using stock_item_id_key on stock t (cost=0.00..8.27 rows=1 width=14) (actual time=0.015..0.015 rows=0 loops=1) Index Cond: ("*VALUES*".column1= item_id)Total runtime: 0.255 ms Next steps here: 1) Performance/concurrency tests against trigger-based UPSERT approach. 2) Finish bit rot cleanup against HEAD. 3) Work out more complicated test cases to try and fine more unexpected behavior edge cases and general bugs. -- Greg Smith, 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support www.2ndQuadrant.us
pgsql-hackers by date: