Re: Setting a pre-existing index as a primary key

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Setting a pre-existing index as a primary key
Date: 2008-05-11 16:32:01
Message-ID: 20080511163201.GE18958@fetter.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 10:41:56PM -0400, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 11:55:29AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > IMHO a utility command should do one easily-explained thing. The
> > fewer options the better.
>
> Sticking to that principle makes for a better-maintained system. I
> agree. If we want to point out, "You might rename your index
> afterwards to make it look like other default primary keys," I have
> no objection.

For convenience, it might be nice to include the generated name in the
notice.

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2008-05-11 16:46:51 Re: XIDs and big boxes again ...
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-05-11 16:30:45 Re: [badalex@gmail.com: Re: [BUGS] Problem identifying constraints which should not be inherited]