On 28 April 2015 at 15:46, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > +1, NEW/OLD seem pretty natural and I'm not worried about what they look > like in rules, and their usage in triggers matches up with what they'd > mean here, I'd think. >
Since I've stuck my head above the parapet once I figured I'd give m y 2p's worth: IMHO NEW/OLD doesn't fit at all. In triggers you're applying it to something that (without the trigger) would be the new or old version of a matching row , so it's completely intuitive ; in this instance without the ON CONFLICT there would never be a " new " , because it would be a failure . MySQL uses VALUES(columnname) to reference the intended INSERT value (what you might term "NEW") and the target name to reference "OLD". I understand that people might think the bracketed syntax isn't very pleasant because that looks like a function, but it seems more reasonable than NEW (can we use VALUES.columname?); finally I don't see why we need an "OLD" (or TARGET) at all - am I missing the point? Geoff
