On 2022-Aug-12, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Sorry, but I disagree with this chunk in the latest commit,
> specifically, changing the MATCHED from after to before the NOT
> MATCHED clause.
>
> The whole point of the second example was to demonstrate that the
> order of the MATCHED/NOT MATCHED clauses
On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 01:53:25PM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2022-Aug-12, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> > Sorry, but I disagree with this chunk in the latest commit,
> > specifically, changing the MATCHED from after to before the NOT
> > MATCHED clause.
3d895bc84 also moved a semicolon into the
On 2022-Aug-12, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Sorry, but I disagree with this chunk in the latest commit,
> specifically, changing the MATCHED from after to before the NOT
> MATCHED clause.
>
> The whole point of the second example was to demonstrate that the
> order of the MATCHED/NOT MATCHED clauses
On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 at 12:20, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2022-Jul-18, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 03:43:41PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > > Should that sentence be removed from MERGE ?
> >
> > Also, I think these examples should be more similar.
>
> Agreed, done.
On 2022-Jul-15, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Should that sentence be removed from MERGE ?
Removed
On 2022-Jul-18, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 03:43:41PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > Should that sentence be removed from MERGE ?
>
> Also, I think these examples should be more
On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 03:43:41PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Should that sentence be removed from MERGE ?
Also, I think these examples should be more similar.
doc/src/sgml/ref/merge.sgml
>
> MERGE INTO CustomerAccount CA
> USING RecentTransactions T
> ON T.CustomerId = CA.CustomerId
> WHEN
On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 12:59:34PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 12:40 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> >
> | If the expression for any column is not of the correct data type, automatic
> type conversion will be attempted.
> > That appears to be copied from the INSERT
On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 12:40 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> That appears to be copied from the INSERT page.
> What does that mean, if not that data types will be resolved as needed ?
>
Yep, and the system needs to resolve the type at a point where there is no
contextual information and so it
On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 12:40 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 12:17:51PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 11:40 AM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > > On 2022-Jul-15, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > >
> > > > It seems a bit odd that it's impossible to use merge
On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 12:17:51PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 11:40 AM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > On 2022-Jul-15, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> >
> > > It seems a bit odd that it's impossible to use merge with prepared
> > > statements
> > > without specifically casting
On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 11:40 AM Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> On 2022-Jul-15, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> > It seems a bit odd that it's impossible to use merge with prepared
> statements
> > without specifically casting the source types (which I did now to
> continue my
> > experiment).
>
> I have no
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> On 2022-Jul-15, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>> I see now that the same thing can happen with "ON CONFLICT" if used with a
>> subselect.
>>
>> PREPARE p AS INSERT INTO t SELECT a FROM (SELECT $1 AS a)a
>> ON CONFLICT (i) DO UPDATE SET i=excluded.i;
>> ERROR: column "i" is of
On 2022-Jul-15, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 11:25:35AM +0200, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
> Thanks for looking into it.
Definitely! Thanks, Matthias.
> I see now that the same thing can happen with "ON CONFLICT" if used with a
> subselect.
>
> PREPARE p AS INSERT INTO t
On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 11:25:35AM +0200, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2022, 18:26 Justin Pryzby, wrote:
> >
> > Why is $1 construed to be of type text ?
>
> The select statement that generates the row type of T `(select $1 CID,
> $2 TxV) AS T` does not put type bounds on the
On Thu, 14 Jul 2022, 18:26 Justin Pryzby, wrote:
>
> We've used INSERT ON CONFLICT for a few years (with partitions as the target).
> That's also combined with prepared statements, for bulk loading.
>
> I was looking to see if we should use MERGE (probably not, but looking
> anyway).
> And came
We've used INSERT ON CONFLICT for a few years (with partitions as the target).
That's also combined with prepared statements, for bulk loading.
I was looking to see if we should use MERGE (probably not, but looking anyway).
And came across this behavior. I'm not sure if it's any issue.
CREATE
16 matches
Mail list logo