On 01/11/2014 11:42 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
I recently suggested that rather than RETURNING REJECTS, we could have a REJECTING clause, which would see a DML statement project strictly the complement of what RETURNING projects in the same context. So perhaps you could also see what RETURNING would not have projected because a before row trigger returned NULL (i.e. when a before trigger indicates to not proceed with insertion). That is certainly more general, and so is perhaps preferable. It's also less verbose, and it seems less likely to matter that we'll need to make REJECTING a fully reserved keyword, as compared to REJECTS. (RETURNING is already a fully reserved keyword not described by the standard, so this makes a certain amount of sense to me). If nothing else, REJECTING is more terse than RETURNING REJECTS.
I do not entirely understand what you are proposing here. Any example how this would look compared to your RETURNING REJECTS proposal?
-- Andreas Karlsson -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
