RObert, > I guess I'm going to have to vote -1 on this proposal. I code see > inventing a pgsql-specific SQLSTATE value for exclusion constraints, > since they will be a pgsql-specific extension, but reusing the unique > key violation value seems misleading. I admit it may help in a > limited number of cases, but IMHO it's not worth the confusion.
I'd rather have a new one than just using "contstraint violation" which is terribly non-specific, and generally makes the application developer think that a value is too large. --Josh BErkus -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
