* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > We seem to have a few options for PG11 > > > > 1. Do nothing, we reject MERGE > > > > 2. Implement MERGE for unique index situations only, attempting to > > avoid errors (Simon OP) > > > > 3. Implement MERGE, but without attempting to avoid concurrent ERRORs > > (Peter) > > > > 4. Implement MERGE, while attempting to avoid concurrent ERRORs in > > cases where that is possible. > > > > Stephen, Robert, please say which option you now believe we should pick. > > I think Peter has made a good case for #3, so I lean toward that > option. I think #4 is too much of a non-obvious behavior difference > between the cases where we can avoid those errors and the cases where > we can't, and I don't see where #2 can go in the future other than #4.
Agreed. Thanks! Stephen
Description: Digital signature