Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Best practices: MERGE

2005-04-18 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Is that broken?
http://momjian.postgresql.org/main/writings/pgsql/sgml/build.html
Chris
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Patch applied.  Thanks.  Sorry for the delay in applying.
---
David Fetter wrote:
On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 12:27:21PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Luckily, PG 8 is available for this.  Do you have a short example?
No, and I think it should be in the manual as an example.
You will need to enter a loop that uses exception handling to detect
unique_violation.
Pursuant to an IRC discussion to which Dennis Bjorklund and
Christopher Kings-Lynne made most of the contributions, please find
enclosed an example patch demonstrating an UPSERT-like capability.
Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100   mobile: +1 415 235 3778
Remember to vote!

[ Attachment, skipping... ]

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
 joining column's datatypes do not match

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
 joining column's datatypes do not match


Re: [HACKERS] Best practices: MERGE

2005-04-18 Thread Bruce Momjian

Patch applied.  Thanks.  Sorry for the delay in applying.

---


David Fetter wrote:
 On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 12:27:21PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
  Luckily, PG 8 is available for this.  Do you have a short example?
  
  No, and I think it should be in the manual as an example.
  
  You will need to enter a loop that uses exception handling to detect
  unique_violation.
 
 Pursuant to an IRC discussion to which Dennis Bjorklund and
 Christopher Kings-Lynne made most of the contributions, please find
 enclosed an example patch demonstrating an UPSERT-like capability.
 
 Cheers,
 D
 -- 
 David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fetter.org/
 phone: +1 510 893 6100   mobile: +1 415 235 3778
 
 Remember to vote!

[ Attachment, skipping... ]

 
 ---(end of broadcast)---
 TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
   joining column's datatypes do not match

-- 
  Bruce Momjian|  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us   |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive, |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.|  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
  joining column's datatypes do not match


Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Best practices: MERGE

2005-04-18 Thread Bruce Momjian

Thanks, fixed.

---

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
 Is that broken?
 
 http://momjian.postgresql.org/main/writings/pgsql/sgml/build.html
 
 Chris
 
 Bruce Momjian wrote:
  Patch applied.  Thanks.  Sorry for the delay in applying.
  
  ---
  
  
  David Fetter wrote:
  
 On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 12:27:21PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
 
 Luckily, PG 8 is available for this.  Do you have a short example?
 
 No, and I think it should be in the manual as an example.
 
 You will need to enter a loop that uses exception handling to detect
 unique_violation.
 
 Pursuant to an IRC discussion to which Dennis Bjorklund and
 Christopher Kings-Lynne made most of the contributions, please find
 enclosed an example patch demonstrating an UPSERT-like capability.
 
 Cheers,
 D
 -- 
 David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fetter.org/
 phone: +1 510 893 6100   mobile: +1 415 235 3778
 
 Remember to vote!
  
  
  [ Attachment, skipping... ]
  
  
 ---(end of broadcast)---
 TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
   joining column's datatypes do not match
  
  
 

-- 
  Bruce Momjian|  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us   |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive, |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.|  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: [HACKERS] Best practices: MERGE

2005-03-08 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2005-03-07 at 19:34 -0800, David Fetter wrote:

 Although the SQL:2003 command MERGE has not yet been implemented in
 PostgreSQL, I'm guessing that there are best practices for how to
 implement the MERGE functionality.
 
 To recap, MERGE means (roughly) INSERT the tuple if no tuple matches
 certain criteria, otherwise UPDATE using similar criteria.

Don't understand that way round...

I thought the logic was:
UPDATE WHERE . (locate row)
IF NOT FOUND THEN
INSERT (new row)

You can create a procedure to do that, but MERGE would work better.

ISTM that would require writing some new code that was a mix of
heap_update and heap_insert logic for the low level stuff would be
required. The existing heap_update code is most similar, since the logic
is roughly

UPDATE WHERE (locate row)
IF FOUND THEN
INSERT (new row version)

though with various changes to row visibility stuff.

One might aim to do this in two stages:
1. initially support a single row upsert such as MySQL's REPLACE command
2. a full implementation of MERGE that used set logic as per the spec

...

Best Regards, Simon Riggs


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: [HACKERS] Best practices: MERGE

2005-03-08 Thread David Fetter
On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 12:27:21PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
 Luckily, PG 8 is available for this.  Do you have a short example?
 
 No, and I think it should be in the manual as an example.
 
 You will need to enter a loop that uses exception handling to detect
 unique_violation.

Pursuant to an IRC discussion to which Dennis Bjorklund and
Christopher Kings-Lynne made most of the contributions, please find
enclosed an example patch demonstrating an UPSERT-like capability.

Cheers,
D
-- 
David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100   mobile: +1 415 235 3778

Remember to vote!
? upsert.diff
Index: doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml
===
RCS file: /projects/cvsroot/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml,v
retrieving revision 1.61
diff -c -r1.61 plpgsql.sgml
*** doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml   14 Feb 2005 00:54:26 -  1.61
--- doc/src/sgml/plpgsql.sgml   8 Mar 2005 08:19:31 -
***
*** 2003,2008 
--- 2003,2042 
don't use literalEXCEPTION/ without need.
   /para
  /tip
+ example id=plpgsql-upsert-example
+ para
+ This example uses an literalEXCEPTION/ to commandUPDATE/ or
+ commandINSERT/, as appropriate.
+ 
+ programlisting
+ CREATE TABLE db (a INT PRIMARY KEY, b TEXT);
+ 
+ CREATE FUNCTION merge_db (key INT, data TEXT) RETURNS VOID AS
+ $$
+ BEGIN
+ LOOP
+ UPDATE db SET b = data WHERE a = key;
+ IF found THEN
+ RETURN;
+ END IF;
+ 
+ BEGIN
+ INSERT INTO db(a,b) VALUES (key, data);
+ RETURN;
+ EXCEPTION WHEN unique_violation THEN
+ -- do nothing
+ END;
+ END LOOP;
+ END;
+ $$
+ LANGUAGE plpgsql;
+ 
+ SELECT merge_db (1, 'david');
+ SELECT merge_db (1, 'dennis');
+ /programlisting
+ 
+ /para
+ /example
/sect2
/sect1
  

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
  joining column's datatypes do not match


Re: [HACKERS] Best practices: MERGE

2005-03-08 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
You can create a procedure to do that, but MERGE would work better.
ISTM that would require writing some new code that was a mix of
heap_update and heap_insert logic for the low level stuff would be
required. The existing heap_update code is most similar, since the logic
is roughly
UPDATE WHERE (locate row)
IF FOUND THEN
INSERT (new row version)
though with various changes to row visibility stuff.
One might aim to do this in two stages:
1. initially support a single row upsert such as MySQL's REPLACE command
2. a full implementation of MERGE that used set logic as per the spec
...
The main issue is dealing with merging into unique index race conditions.
Chris
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


[HACKERS] Best practices: MERGE

2005-03-07 Thread David Fetter
Folks,

Although the SQL:2003 command MERGE has not yet been implemented in
PostgreSQL, I'm guessing that there are best practices for how to
implement the MERGE functionality.

To recap, MERGE means (roughly) INSERT the tuple if no tuple matches
certain criteria, otherwise UPDATE using similar criteria.

The correct solution, as far as I can tell, is to acquire a LOCK on
the table IN SHARE MODE at the beginning of the transaction, but this
has (at least for many applications) unacceptable performance
characteristics.  Accepting that there is a slight risk of a race
condition when *not* locking the table at the beginning of the
transaction, what procedure minimizes this risk and recovers well from
said race condition, should it occur?

TIA for any hints, tips or pointers on this :)

Cheers,
D
-- 
David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100   mobile: +1 415 235 3778

Remember to vote!

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: [HACKERS] Best practices: MERGE

2005-03-07 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
The correct solution, as far as I can tell, is to acquire a LOCK on
the table IN SHARE MODE at the beginning of the transaction, but this
has (at least for many applications) unacceptable performance
characteristics.  Accepting that there is a slight risk of a race
condition when *not* locking the table at the beginning of the
transaction, what procedure minimizes this risk and recovers well from
said race condition, should it occur?
IN SHARE MODE is not enough, you can get deadlocks.  You require IN 
SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE MODE.  other than that, it's a sucky solution 
because it breaks concurrency.  In pgsql 8, you can do it using pl/pgsql 
exception handling.

Chris
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: [HACKERS] Best practices: MERGE

2005-03-07 Thread David Fetter
On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 11:45:19AM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
 The correct solution, as far as I can tell, is to acquire a LOCK
 on the table IN SHARE MODE at the beginning of the transaction, but
 this has (at least for many applications) unacceptable performance
 characteristics.  Accepting that there is a slight risk of a race
 condition when *not* locking the table at the beginning of the
 transaction, what procedure minimizes this risk and recovers well
 from said race condition, should it occur?
 
 IN SHARE MODE is not enough, you can get deadlocks.  You require IN
 SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE MODE.  other than that, it's a sucky solution
 because it breaks concurrency.  In pgsql 8, you can do it using
 pl/pgsql exception handling.

Luckily, PG 8 is available for this.  Do you have a short example?

Cheers,
D
-- 
David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100   mobile: +1 415 235 3778

Remember to vote!

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] Best practices: MERGE

2005-03-07 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Luckily, PG 8 is available for this.  Do you have a short example?
No, and I think it should be in the manual as an example.
You will need to enter a loop that uses exception handling to detect 
unique_violation.

Chris
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
 subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
 message can get through to the mailing list cleanly