From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Postgresql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Information Schema and constraint names not unique |
Date: | 2003-11-06 16:49:56 |
Message-ID: | 20031106164956.GI2713@dcc.uchile.cl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 11:42:13AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > I don't think we really need a method to guarantee unique names. It would
> > already help a lot if we just added the table name, or something that was
> > until a short time before the action believed to be the table name, or
> > even only the table OID, before (or after) the $1.
>
> I don't have a problem with switching from "$1" to "tablename_$1", or
> some such, for auto-generated constraint names. But if it's not
> guaranteed unique, does it really satisfy Philip's concern?
It certainly _is_ unique within a schema ...
(But what happens to the constraint name when the table is renamed?)
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"No renuncies a nada. No te aferres a nada."
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-11-06 16:57:57 | Re: Information Schema and constraint names not unique |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2003-11-06 16:48:01 | Re: Changes to Contributor List |