On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 3:29 AM Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree that additional testing in this area is valuable. Patch 0001
> looks reasonable to me, on a quick read-through. In patch 0002, I
> think it would be valuable to also test updating the parent row to
> time periods consistent and not consistent with the insert, to confirm
> that that behaves correctly.
Thanks for taking a look! Here are new patches with those extra tests.
There are extensive regress tests already, so I just tested the same
concurrency pattern. I think the results are okay. I do get a
can't-serialize exception for a couple valid changes under REPEATABLE
READ and SERIALIZE, but I think they are expected and not a bug. (I
think you would see the same thing outside of FKs.)
--
Paul ~{:-)
pj@illuminatedcomputing.com