On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 at 16:29, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Simon Riggs <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> > On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 at 14:56, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> Um, what's that got to do with it? The example in
> >> read-write-unique-4.spec involves only a single pkey constraint.
>
> > Yes, but as you explained, its not actually a serializable case, it
> > just looks a bit like one.
>
> > That means we are not currently aware of any case where the situation
> > is serializable but the error message is uniqueness violation, unless
> > we have 2 or more unique constraints and/or an exclusion constraint.
>
> Meh. I'm disinclined to document it at that level of detail, both
> because it's subject to change and because we're not sure that that
> list is exhaustive. I think a bit of handwaving is preferable.
> How about the attached? (Only the third new para is different.)
It's much better, thanks.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.EnterpriseDB.com/