Kuroda-San, I looked at the code. Currently it is slightly
complicated. Can we please simplify it by removing different
message-styles for a single conflict. For example
MULTIPLE_UNIQUE_CONFLICTS has below:
1)
When key and local rows are there:
"Key %s already exists in unique index \"%s\", modified locally in
transaction %u at %s: local row %s.
When key is not there:
"Unique index \"%s\" rejects applying due to local row %s, modified
locally in transaction %u at %s."
When local row is not there:
"Key %s already exists in unique index \"%s\", modified locally in
transaction %u at %s."
When both key and local row is not there:
Remote row violates unique constraint \"%s\", modified locally in
transaction %u at %s."
Can we try to construct message like this: (both key value and local
row at the end)
Key already exists in unique index "conf_tab_pkey", modified locally
in transaction <..> at <...>: Key (a)=(2), local row (2, 2, 2),
We can keep the message same for all 4 cases above.
2)
Also there are many if-else blocks around the below type of message as well:
DETAIL: Could not find the row to be updated by using replica
identity (i)=(30): remote row (30, 300).
If we instead have this:
DETAIL: Could not find the row to be updated: replica identity
(i)=(30), remote row (30, 300).
Will it simplify the code, can you please check?
thanks
Shveta
