On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 6:25 AM, Craig Ringer <cr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > It'll be yet another way for people to get upsert wrong, of course. > They'll use a wCTE with RETURNING REJECTS to do an UPDATE of the rejects > w/o locking the table against writes first. Documenting this pitfall > should be enough, though.
My preferred solution is to actually provide a variant to lock the rows implicated in the would-be unique constraint violation. Obviously that's a harder problem to solve. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
