Hi Nisha,
I saw this patch was already pushed [1], but there was one thing I
never quite understood about this feature, and I didn't find the
answer in the thread posts above.
My question: Why is there only a single new conflict type being added here?
e.g.
Conflict due to INSERT
- single conflict ==> 'insert_exists'
- multiple conflicts ==> 'multiple_unique_conflicts'
Conflict due to UPDATE
- single conflict ==> 'update_exists'
- multiple conflicts ==> 'multiple_unique_conflicts'
My point is, if it is deemed useful for a user to know if a *single*
conflict was caused by an INSERT or by an UPDATE, then why is it not
equally useful to know if *multiple* conflicts were caused by an
INSERT or by an UPDATE?
In other words, instead of just 'multiple_unique_conflicts', why
wasn't this new conflict type split into two, something like
'insert_multiple_conflicts' and 'update_multiple_conflicts'?
======
[1] https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commit/73eba5004a06a744b6b8570e42432b9e9f75997b
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia
