Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> I guess I shoulda been paying closer attention :-(. That really, really >> seems like fundamentally the wrong direction. What was it that was >> unfixable about the other way? If it is unfixable, should we revert >> ModifyTable?
> The relevant thread is here: > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-02/msg00783.php My opinion is still the same as here: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-02/msg00688.php namely, that all we should be worrying about is a tuplestore full of RETURNING tuples. Any other side-effects of a DML subquery should *not* be visible to the calling query, and therefore all this argument about snapshots and seqscan limits is beside the point. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
