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
