On Fri, 2024-10-18 at 06:50 +, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/sql-insert.html#SQL-ON-CONFLICT
>
> In section on conflict nothing that there will be implicit savepoint (sub
> transaction). But this is important to know to mark function as PARAL
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/sql-insert.html
Description:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/sql-insert.html#SQL-ON-CONFLICT
In section on conflict nothing that there will be implicit savepoint (sub
transaction
Hello!
The new sample code looks clearer I agree!
Seb
From: David G. Johnston
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2022 4:41 PM
To: Sebastien Flaesch ; Pg Docs
Subject: Re: Missing example for SAVEPOINT using the same savepoint name
EXTERNAL: Do not click links or open
to illustrate the
> behavior when reusing the same savepoint name.
>
>
I agree with the premise but not the implementation. I've attached (and
inlined) a patch that implements the example change, updates savepoint to
introduce the behavior prior to the example, and updates the rol
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/sql-savepoint.html
Description:
The "Compatibility" section deserves some code example to illustrate the
behavior when reusing the same savepoint name.
Maybe this could hel
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 4:20 AM Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On 04.06.21 02:08, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > The example in the update documentation that does an upsert using a
> > savepoint seems like it should just go away now tha
On 04.06.21 02:08, David G. Johnston wrote:
The example in the update documentation that does an upsert using a
savepoint seems like it should just go away now that we have insert...on
conflict. Making an explicit reference (and link) to that feature in
the Update documentation should be
Hey,
The example in the update documentation that does an upsert using a
savepoint seems like it should just go away now that we have insert...on
conflict. Making an explicit reference (and link) to that feature in the
Update documentation should be added in its place (well, under notes).
David
