Thank you for true response will try out.

Sajeev

On 5/16/13 10:27 AM, "Steven Schlansker" <ste...@likeness.com> wrote:

>
>On May 15, 2013, at 11:52 PM, Thomas Kellerer <spam_ea...@gmx.net> wrote:
>
>> Sajeev Mayandi, 16.05.2013 07:01:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Our company is planning to move to postreSQL. We were initially using
>>> sybase where upsert functionality was available using "insert on
>>> existing update" clause.  I know there multiple ways to fix this
>>> using RULE or separate function in postgresql.  But I would like to
>>> know which version of postgresql has support for upsert planned using
>>> an official syntax. I have postgresql 9.2 which does not have this
>>> feature, if its planned in near future, I would rather wait to
>>> migrate to PostgreSQL.
>>> 
>> 
>> You can use writeable CTEs for this purpose.
>> 
>> There are several examples out there:
>> 
>> http://www.xzilla.net/blog/2011/Mar/Upserting-via-Writeable-CTE.html
>> http://www.depesz.com/2011/03/16/waiting-for-9-1-writable-cte/
>> http://www.depesz.com/2012/06/10/why-is-upsert-so-complicated/
>> 
>> http://stackoverflow.com/a/8702291/330315
>
>One thing I didn't see mentioned in two of the links -- they mention race
>conditions, where multiple writers can still cause the faked UPSERT to
>fail.
>
>This can be avoided using SERIALIZABLE transactions, now that Postgres has
>SSI.  http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/SSI
>
>I can vouch that we use writable CTEs and SERIALIZABLE to implement UPSERT
>in production with no issues thus far.
>
>
>
>-- 
>Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
>To make changes to your subscription:
>http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general



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

Reply via email to