On 2015-04-28 10:40:10 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote: > > On 2015-04-28 16:36:28 +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: > > > I am also very sure that every time I'll write this statement I will have > > > to > > > look into manual for the names of TARGET and EXCLUDED because they don't > > > seem intuitive to me at all (especially the EXCLUDED). > > > > Same here. I don't understand why 'CONFLICTING' would be more ambiguous > > than EXCLUDED (as Peter argued earlier). Especially given that the whole > > syntax is called ON CONFLICT. > > Any way we can alias it? Both of those strike me as annoyingly long and > if we could allow an alias then people can do whatever they want... > > No, I haven't got any suggestion on how to do that. :) > > It's also something we can probably improve on in the future...
I earlier suggested NEW/OLD. I still think that's not too bad as I don't buy the argument that they're too associated with rules. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
