This allows a RETURNING clause to be appended to a MERGE query, to
return values based on each row inserted, updated, or deleted. As with
plain INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE commands, the returned values are
based on the new contents of the target table for INSERT and UPDATE
actions, and on its old contents for DELETE actions. Values from the
source relation may also be returned.
As with INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE, the output of MERGE ... RETURNING may be
used as the source relation for other operations such as WITH queries
and COPY commands.
Additionally, a special function merge_action() is provided, which
returns 'INSERT', 'UPDATE', or 'DELETE', depending on the action
executed for each row. The merge_action() function can be used
anywhere in the RETURNING list, including in arbitrary expressions and
subqueries, but it is an error to use it anywhere outside of a MERGE
query's RETURNING list.
Dean Rasheed, reviewed by Isaac Morland, Vik Fearing, Alvaro Herrera,
Gurjeet Singh, Jian He, Jeff Davis, Merlin Moncure, Peter Eisentraut,
and Wolfgang Walther.
Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCWePEGQR5LBn-vD6SfeLZafzEm2Qy_L_Oky2=qw2w3Pzg@mail.gmail.com
Postgres has traditionally considered the syntactic forms f(x) and x.f
to be equivalent, allowing tricks such as writing a function and then
using it as though it were a computed-on-demand column. However, our
behavior when both interpretations are feasible left something to be
desired: we always chose the column interpretation. This could lead
to very surprising results, as in a recent bug report from Neil Conway.
It also created a dump-and-reload hazard, since what was a function
call in a dumped view could get interpreted as a column reference
at reload, if a matching column name had been added to the underlying
table since the view was created.
What seems better, in ambiguous situations, is to prefer the choice
matching the syntactic form of the reference. This seems much less
astonishing in general, and it fixes the dump/reload hazard.
Although this could be called a bug fix, there have been few complaints
and there's some small risk of breaking applications that depend on the
old behavior, so no back-patch. It does seem reasonable to slip it
into v11, though.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAOW5sYa3Wp7KozCuzjOdw6PiOYPi6D=VvRybtH2S=2C0SVmRmA@mail.gmail.com
Since some preparation work had already been done, the only source
changes left were changing empty-element tags like <xref linkend="foo">
to <xref linkend="foo"/>, and changing the DOCTYPE.
The source files are still named *.sgml, but they are actually XML files
now. Renaming could be considered later.
In the build system, the intermediate step to convert from SGML to XML
is removed. Everything is build straight from the source files again.
The OpenSP (or the old SP) package is no longer needed.
The documentation toolchain instructions are updated and are much
simpler now.
Peter Eisentraut, Alexander Lakhin, Jürgen Purtz
This is the last major omission in our domains feature: you can now
make a domain over anything that's not a pseudotype.
The major complication from an implementation standpoint is that places
that might be creating tuples of a domain type now need to be prepared
to apply domain_check(). It seems better that unprepared code fail
with an error like "<type> is not composite" than that it silently fail
to apply domain constraints. Therefore, relevant infrastructure like
get_func_result_type() and lookup_rowtype_tupdesc() has been adjusted
to treat domain-over-composite as a distinct case that unprepared code
won't recognize, rather than just transparently treating it the same
as plain composite. This isn't a 100% solution to the possibility of
overlooked domain checks, but it catches most places.
In passing, improve typcache.c's support for domains (it can now cache
the identity of a domain's base type), and rewrite the argument handling
logic in jsonfuncs.c's populate_record[set]_worker to reduce duplicative
per-call lookups.
I believe this is code-complete so far as the core and contrib code go.
The PLs need varying amounts of work, which will be tackled in followup
patches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/4206.1499798337@sss.pgh.pa.us
I was a bit surprised to find that domains were almost completely
unmentioned in the main SGML documentation, outside of the reference
pages for CREATE/ALTER/DROP DOMAIN. In particular, noplace was it
mentioned that we don't support domains over composite, making it
hard to document the planned fix for that.
Hence, add a section about domains to chapter 8 (Data Types).
Also, modernize the type system overview in section 37.2; it had never
heard of range types, and insisted on calling arrays base types, which
seems a bit odd from a user's perspective; furthermore it didn't fit well
with the fact that we now support arrays over types other than base types.
It seems appropriate to use the term "container types" to describe all of
arrays, composites, and ranges, so let's do that.
Also a few other minor improvements, notably improve an example query
in rowtypes.sgml by using a LATERAL function instead of an ad-hoc
OFFSET 0 clause.
In part this is mop-up for commit c12d570fa, which missed updating 37.2
to reflect the fact that it added arrays of domains. We could possibly
back-patch this without that claim, but I don't feel a strong need to.
For DocBook XML compatibility, don't use SGML empty tags (</>) anymore,
replace by the full tag name. Add a warning option to catch future
occurrences.
Alexander Lakhin, Jürgen Purtz
Create a section specifically for the syntactic rules around whole-row
variable usage, such as expansion of "foo.*". This was previously
documented only haphazardly, with some critical info buried in
unexpected places like xfunc-sql-composite-functions. Per repeated
questions in different mailing lists.
Discussion: <16288.1479610770@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Standard English uses "may", "can", and "might" in different ways:
may - permission, "You may borrow my rake."
can - ability, "I can lift that log."
might - possibility, "It might rain today."
Unfortunately, in conversational English, their use is often mixed, as
in, "You may use this variable to do X", when in fact, "can" is a better
choice. Similarly, "It may crash" is better stated, "It might crash".
Also update two error messages mentioned in the documenation to match.
more, and standard_conforming_strings less, because in the future non-E
strings will not treat backslashes specially.
Also use E'' strings where backslashes are used in examples. (The
existing examples would have drawn warnings.)
Backpatch to 8.2.X.
As a side effect, cause subscripts in INSERT targetlists to do something
more or less sensible; previously we evaluated such subscripts and then
effectively ignored them. Another side effect is that UPDATE-ing an
element or slice of an array value that is NULL now produces a non-null
result, namely an array containing just the assigned-to positions.
Dean Rasheed
Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut
Magnus Hagander