On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 at 16:29, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Simon Riggs <simon.ri...@enterprisedb.com> writes: > > On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 at 14:56, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> Um, what's that got to do with it? The example in > >> read-write-unique-4.spec involves only a single pkey constraint. > > > Yes, but as you explained, its not actually a serializable case, it > > just looks a bit like one. > > > That means we are not currently aware of any case where the situation > > is serializable but the error message is uniqueness violation, unless > > we have 2 or more unique constraints and/or an exclusion constraint. > > Meh. I'm disinclined to document it at that level of detail, both > because it's subject to change and because we're not sure that that > list is exhaustive. I think a bit of handwaving is preferable. > How about the attached? (Only the third new para is different.)
It's much better, thanks. -- Simon Riggs http://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
