Re: PGSQL bug - "Column ??? is an identity column defined as GENERATED ALWAYS.",

Is there a possibility to have that fixed rather than using the workaround?
The problem is with ORM frameworks where there is no possibility to use
this clause OVERRIDING SYSTEM VALUE ...

Thank you
P.

On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 11:54 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> "David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Wednesday, August 18, 2021, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@
> > enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> >> This has been fixed in PostgreSQL 14.
>
> > The OP is reporting a regression, saying it is fixed in v14 isn’t a
> useful
> > response. Is it also fixed in v11.14?
>
> The OP would have to provide some evidence that there's actually any
> regression. AFAIK that code was like that since IDENTITY columns were
> introduced. v14 does improve matters, but we judged the fix too invasive
> to risk back-patching.
>
> BTW, the v11 error message points out a simple workaround, which
> seems to do the trick:
>
> regression=# CREATE TABLE sample_table (
> id int8 NOT NULL GENERATED ALWAYS AS IDENTITY,
> name varchar(255) NOT NULL,
> description text NOT NULL,
> CONSTRAINT sample_table_pk PRIMARY KEY (id)
> );
> CREATE TABLE
>
> regression=# INSERT INTO sample_table (id, name, description)VALUES
> (DEFAULT, 'John
> Doe', 'Test description')
> , (DEFAULT, 'Jane Eod', 'Not working');
> ERROR: cannot insert into column "id"
> DETAIL: Column "id" is an identity column defined as GENERATED ALWAYS.
> HINT: Use OVERRIDING SYSTEM VALUE to override.
>
> regression=# INSERT INTO sample_table (id, name, description) OVERRIDING
> SYSTEM VALUE VALUES (DEFAULT, 'John
> Doe', 'Test description')
> , (DEFAULT, 'Jane Eod', 'Not working');
> INSERT 0 2
>
> regression=# table sample_table;
> id | name | description
> ----+----------+------------------
> 1 | John +| Test description
> | Doe |
> 2 | Jane Eod | Not working
> (2 rows)
>
>
> Yeah, per spec you shouldn't have to say OVERRIDING SYSTEM VALUE
> for this case, but it didn't seem worth the risk of back-patching
> to improve that in stable branches.
>
> regards, tom lane
>