The newly added ON CONFLICT clause allows to specify an alternative to
raising a unique or exclusion constraint violation error when inserting.
ON CONFLICT refers to constraints that can either be specified using a
inference clause (by specifying the columns of a unique constraint) or
by naming a unique or exclusion constraint. DO NOTHING avoids the
constraint violation, without touching the pre-existing row. DO UPDATE
SET ... [WHERE ...] updates the pre-existing tuple, and has access to
both the tuple proposed for insertion and the existing tuple; the
optional WHERE clause can be used to prevent an update from being
executed. The UPDATE SET and WHERE clauses have access to the tuple
proposed for insertion using the "magic" EXCLUDED alias, and to the
pre-existing tuple using the table name or its alias.
This feature is often referred to as upsert.
This is implemented using a new infrastructure called "speculative
insertion". It is an optimistic variant of regular insertion that first
does a pre-check for existing tuples and then attempts an insert. If a
violating tuple was inserted concurrently, the speculatively inserted
tuple is deleted and a new attempt is made. If the pre-check finds a
matching tuple the alternative DO NOTHING or DO UPDATE action is taken.
If the insertion succeeds without detecting a conflict, the tuple is
deemed inserted.
To handle the possible ambiguity between the excluded alias and a table
named excluded, and for convenience with long relation names, INSERT
INTO now can alias its target table.
Bumps catversion as stored rules change.
Author: Peter Geoghegan, with significant contributions from Heikki
Linnakangas and Andres Freund. Testing infrastructure by Jeff Janes.
Reviewed-By: Heikki Linnakangas, Andres Freund, Robert Haas, Simon Riggs,
Dean Rasheed, Stephen Frost and many others.
RETURNING play nice with views/rules. To wit, have the rule rewriter
rewrite any RETURNING clause found in a rule to produce what the rule's
triggering query asked for in its RETURNING clause, in particular drop
the RETURNING clause if no RETURNING in the triggering query. This
leaves the responsibility for knowing how to produce the view's output
columns on the rule author, without requiring any fundamental changes
in rule semantics such as adding new rule event types would do. The
initial implementation constrains things to ensure that there is
exactly one, unconditionally invoked RETURNING clause among the rules
for an event --- later we might be able to relax that, but for a post
feature freeze fix it seems better to minimize how much invention we do.
Per gripe from Jaime Casanova.
nonunique join value, leading to plan-choice-dependent results ... and
it seems some platforms will choose a different plan. Tweak the test
so that it has well-defined results. Per report from Olivier Prenant.
plpgsql support to come later. Along the way, convert execMain's
SELECT INTO support into a DestReceiver, in order to eliminate some ugly
special cases.
Jonah Harris and Tom Lane
Andres Freund
Robert Haas
Peter Eisentraut
Tom Lane