Re: [HACKERS] Partitioning vs ON CONFLICT - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Partitioning vs ON CONFLICT
Date
Msg-id CANP8+j+SgSShsRNFoRPXh1c0yp3D1R=H-uUkQotnAG+COVapow@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] Partitioning vs ON CONFLICT  (Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Partitioning vs ON CONFLICT  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 16 February 2017 at 14:54, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> At the moment, partitioned tables have a restriction that prevents
> them allowing INSERT ... ON CONFLICT ... statements:
>
> postgres=# INSERT INTO cities SELECT 1, 'Crawley',105000 ON CONFLICT
> (city_id) DO NOTHING;
> ERROR:  ON CONFLICT clause is not supported with partitioned tables
>
> Why do we have such a restriction?  And what would it take to remove it?

Partitioned tables don't yet support a global unique constraint that
would be required for support of ON CONFLICT processing.

-- 
Simon Riggs                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Surafel Temsgen
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New CORRESPONDING clause design
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Append implementation