Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE} - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZSgGCBm-5YerVq++eF+X30+m7CR-SVr2rvK9zGnmBAJYw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}  (Anssi Kääriäinen <anssi.kaariainen@thl.fi>)
Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT {UPDATE | IGNORE}  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:04 AM, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Yes, I think that's pretty important. With a negative attno so it's
> treated as a "hidden" col that must be explicitly named to be shown and
> won't be confused with user columns.

I think that the standard for adding a new system attribute ought to
be enormous. The only case where a new one was added post-Postgres95
was "tableoid". I'm pretty sure that others aren't going to want to do
it that way. Besides, I'm not entirely convinced that this is actually
an important distinction to expose.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Sequence Access Method WIP
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: SSL regression test suite