W dniu 19.07.2015 o 16:33, Adrian Klaver pisze:
> On 07/19/2015 06:47 AM, Rafal Pietrak wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> W dniu 19.07.2015 o 14:10, Geoff Winkless pisze:
>>> On 19 July 2015 at 11:30, Rafal Pietrak <rafal@ztk-rp.eu
[---------------]
>> Although "a random" can duplicate its previous values, "my random(s)"
>> (which are created for this application purpose) cannot be duplicated
>> when it's stored in the database as "live active data". I understand,
>> that UNIQUE constraint is precisely the RDBMS tool to guarantee that.
>
> From my perspective the issue is, you are using a 'unique' key generator
> that you know is not creating unique keys and then asking the database
> to make it right. Sort of like making a square peg fit a round hole by
> shaving the corners. It is possible but has sort of a messy feel to it.
Hmmm, yes.
Yet, I don't feel guilty as much, since that is quite similar to a
unique key on database "username", while the "generator" (human mind)
does not guarantee that. The DB just makes sure it does.
[--------------]
>
> So an UPSERT is just one feature of ON CONFLICT. The other being DO
> NOTHING. Therefore I could see an argument made for adding other ON
> CONFLICT clauses. How difficult/plausible that would be is above my
> level of expertise.
>
Mine too. But I'd say that the above wording exactly makes the point I
was trying to make. Thank you.
-R