Re: Question on error code selection in conflict detection

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Question on error code selection in conflict detection
Date: 2025-06-09 19:55:43
Message-ID: CA+TgmoaoWmD3pkgaO7BJCpfEOrvDz6trfT27DmUaQpEJ26ktCw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 9:45 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I was reviewing the code for conflict reporting and became curious
> about the choice of ERRCODE_T_R_SERIALIZATION_FAILURE. This error code
> typically signifies a serialization failure within a transaction under
> serializable isolation, so its use here for a different type of
> conflict seems somewhat out of place. I did notice its use in other
> contexts for recovery conflicts in physical replication, which also
> struck me as a bit unusual.
>
> Given these observations, I'm wondering if it would be more
> appropriate to introduce a new, more specific error code for this
> purpose?

Makes sense to me. I'm not sure if we should use a new error code or
some other existing one, but conflating other things with serializable
failures seems like a bad plan.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dimitrios Apostolou 2025-06-09 20:08:29 Re: [PING] [PATCH v2] parallel pg_restore: avoid disk seeks when jumping short distance forward
Previous Message Jesper Pedersen 2025-06-09 19:48:49 Re: pg_rewind: Doc update for PostgreSQL 18