Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11
Date
Msg-id CAH2-Wzm2CfzM8xNp7e-B6Oxn6FYXmH59iow7qf4zBpz3tTDAUg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 12:42 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> I'm happy to quote your words.
>
> "I've acknowledged that the standard has something to
> say on this that supports your position, which has real weight."
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAH2-WzkAjSN1H-ym-sSDh%2B6EJWmEhyHdDStzXDB%2BFxt1hcKEgg%40mail.gmail.com

Immediately afterwards, in that same e-mail, I go on to say: "I'm not
asking about WHEN AND here (that was my last question) [Simon quoted
my last response to said question]. I'm asking about a subselect that
appears in the targetlist."

Even if you are right to take "I've acknowledged that the standard has
something to say on this that supports your position" as a blanket
endorsement of disallowing subselects in all 3 places, I still don't
see why this is worth even talking about. That would mean that I said
something on January 29th that I subsequently withdrew on February
1st.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN fast default
Next
From: Mark Rofail
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: Foreign Key Arrays