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

From Amit Langote
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Partitioning vs ON CONFLICT
Date
Msg-id bec4412e-de46-4a4c-bdab-337bcce0cfe0@lab.ntt.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Partitioning vs ON CONFLICT  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Partitioning vs ON CONFLICT  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2017/08/02 4:02, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 12:26 AM, Amit Langote
> <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>> So is the latest patch posted upthread to process ON CONFLICT DO NOTHING
>> using locally-defined unique indexes on leaf partitions something to consider?
> 
> Yeah, for v11.

OK.

>> Maybe, not until we have cascading index definition working [1]?
> 
> Not sure what that has to do with it.

Hmm, scratch that.  I was thinking that if all partitions had uniformly
defined (unique) indexes, the behavior on specifying on conflict do
nothing would be consistent across all partitions, but I guess that's not
a really big win or anything.

Thanks,
Amit




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Why does logical replication launcher exit with exitcode 1?
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Why does logical replication launcher exit with exitcode 1?