| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com> |
| Cc: | jim(at)nasby(dot)net, Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Plans for index names unique to a table? |
| Date: | 2003-05-11 02:40:49 |
| Message-ID: | 10633.1052620849@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com> writes:
> Indexes, views, tables - all are global namespace thingies and therefore
> required to be globally unique in SQL. At least SQL's consistent in its
> treatment of names.
Actually, indexes do not exist as a concept at all in the SQL standard.
They're swept under the rug as an implementation detail. So we're quite
on our own to do what we like.
If I were designing in a green field I'd probably make indexes have
table-local names --- but historically they've not been so in Postgres,
and it does not seem worth the work or compatibility hit to change it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-05-11 02:46:25 | Re: realtime data inserts |
| Previous Message | Ron Johnson | 2003-05-10 18:31:30 | Re: realtime data inserts |