On 2015-04-23 15:52:40 +0100, Geoff Winkless wrote:
> When I set out I was really only hoping to express a preference as a user;
> on balance I would really rather not have DO IGNORE, if it were possible to
> avoid, because it's really ugly, but DO UPDATE/DO NOTHING I could just
> about cope with (and means you don't need to add IGNORE as a keyword,
> win!), although it still mildly pains me that there's an additional
> unnecessary word.
Yea, DO NOTHING is a good alternative. And I do like we're adding one
keyword less (which is also good for the parser's
size/performance).
DO {UPDATE ... | NOTHING | LOCK} doesn't sound too bad to me (yes, LOCK
doesn't exist yet, except by writing UPDATE .. WHERE false ;)).
Greetings,
Andres Freund