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

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11
Date
Msg-id CANP8+jJtsL3fYgiRWYB5vM9g98iFNHgBeCtPufUkgVShpEFvvg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11  (Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>)
Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 1 November 2017 at 18:20, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:

> In Postgres, you can avoid duplicate violations with MERGE by using a
> higher isolation level (these days, those are turned into a
> serialization error at higher isolation levels when no duplicate is
> visible to the xact's snapshot).

So if I understand you correctly, in your view MERGE should just fail
with an ERROR if it runs concurrently with other DML?

i.e. if a race condition between the query and an INSERT runs
concurrently with another INSERT

We have no interest in making that work?

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


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11
Next
From: Nico Williams
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] proposal: schema variables