Re: Duplicate key error

From: yudhi s <learnerdatabase99(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Duplicate key error
Date: 2024-11-12 20:38:45
Message-ID: CAEzWdqcG8wFcVCcW-7YVsPWxb-9uzHcKNmyYOdLEZ6o1MHC8Aw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 1:35 AM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 12:41 AM yudhi s <learnerdatabase99(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > So it means it will ensure no duplication happens for ID values, but
> still we are seeing "duplicate key" error. So what is the possible reason
> here or are we encountering any buggy behaviour here?
>
> MERGE doesn't actually make any promises about not getting unique
> violations. Only ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE (and ON CONFLICT DO NOTHING)
> make such a promise. That's the main reason why Postgres supports
> both.
>
>
Okay. But here in this Merge statement it should first compare the ON
clause which is the value of ID column and if its exists in the
target table then its a MATCH which means it will do the UPDATE and if
its not available in the target table then its a NOT MATCH and it will do
the INSERT, so i am wondering at what exact situation it will throw
duplicate key error. Also the WITH clause will only pick one record at a
time and run the MERGE, so it will only merge one record at a time and then
commit. Can you share your thoughts on how exactly this merge query can
possibly cause the duplicate key error?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2024-11-12 20:43:55 Re: Duplicate key error
Previous Message Mark Phillips 2024-11-12 18:54:21 Re: create policy statement USING clause