Re: BUG #14526: no unique or exclusion constraint matching the ON CONFLICT

From: Tiago Babo <tiago(dot)babo(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #14526: no unique or exclusion constraint matching the ON CONFLICT
Date: 2017-02-07 23:46:49
Message-ID: CAPsQ5r8AYF0uyUxqRuV9XRDFEDMfSHZAy8xQf2Tj1rvz7uVoVQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Maybe it was not the best use of the word "crashes". It gives me the error
I showed you.

I don't really understand how PostgreSQL handles indexes, but would it be
possible that the INDEX is being used/updated at that moment and so the
INSERT doesn't know it exists? Can concurrency also be a problem?

Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> escreveu no dia terça, 7/02/2017 às 23:36:

> On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Tiago Babo <tiago(dot)babo(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > The only difference (so it seems), is that when it crashes, the person
> was created in the seconds before creating the account. When it previously
> exists in the persons table, it never gives the error.
>
> It crashes?
>
> Anyway, it's very hard to see how that could be, since the error in
> question is thrown from within the planner. I don't recall the exact
> details of how inference will do offhand, but I am suspicious of the
> cast that appears in the partial index predicate.
>
> --
> Peter Geoghegan
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-02-07 23:49:47 Re: BUG #14526: no unique or exclusion constraint matching the ON CONFLICT
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2017-02-07 23:36:30 Re: BUG #14526: no unique or exclusion constraint matching the ON CONFLICT