On Tuesday 14 July 2015 11:33:34 Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 4:09 AM, Yourfriend <doudou...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Suggestion: When a conflict was found for UPSERT, don't access the > > sequence, so users can have a reasonable list of ID. > > This is not technically feasible. What if the arbiter index is a serial PK? > > The same thing can happen when a transaction is aborted. SERIAL is not > guaranteed to be gapless.
Could there be a version of UPSERT where an update is tried, and if 0 records are modified, an insert is done? Just wondering, I haven't got am use-case for that. I don't mid gaps in sequences. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
