From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | r t <pgsql(at)xzilla(dot)net>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com>, Steve Singer <ssinger(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info>, Steve Singer <ssinger_pg(at)sympatico(dot)ca>, PGSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index |
Date: | 2010-12-05 19:09:31 |
Message-ID: | 1291576171.10677.2.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On fre, 2010-12-03 at 15:27 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 2:56 PM, r t <pgsql(at)xzilla(dot)net> wrote:
> > What exactly was the objection to the following -->
> > ALTER TABLE table_name ADD PRIMARY KEY (column_list) USING index_name;
> > Is the objection that you might have been trying to specify a constraint
> > named "using" ? I'm willing to make that option more difficult. :-)
>
> I think it's that someone might expect the word after USING to be the
> name of an index AM.
That could be avoided by writing
USING INDEX <name>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rob Wultsch | 2010-12-05 19:45:17 | Re: profiling connection overhead |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2010-12-05 18:59:13 | Re: profiling connection overhead |