On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 05:02:19PM +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > 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).
No question that DO IGNORE sounds awkward. DO NOTHING also matches CREATE RULE --- another plus. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
