| From: | Karsten Hilbert <Karsten(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net> | 
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: how to find foreign key details (column, that is) | 
| Date: | 2009-01-21 19:14:47 | 
| Message-ID: | 20090121191447.GA3899@merkur.hilbert.loc | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general | 
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 01:49:44PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Karsten Hilbert <Karsten(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > > This is what my 8.3 manual says:
> > 
> > > conkey │ int2[] │ pg_attribute.attnum │ If a table constraint, list of columns which the constraint constrains │
> > 
> > > From that I wouldn't have figured it'd apply to foreign keys
> > > as well. So I assume it is fair to say that "foreign keys
> > > are one type of table constraint", right ?
> > 
> > Right.  I think what the comment is actually trying to point out is that
> > conkey isn't relevant to domain constraints, which also appear in
> > pg_constraint.
> 
> Can someone come up with better documention wording for conkey?  I
> can't:
> 
> 	http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/catalog-pg-constraint.html
How about adding a second line:
"Note: since foreign keys are table constraints, applies to those, too."
or
"If a foreign key, list of columns referencing the target table"
(note, "referencing" as opposed to "referenced by" as in confkey)
Karsten
-- 
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD  4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kirk Strauser | 2009-01-21 19:18:47 | Followup: Here's why I want to use connection pooling middleware! | 
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-01-21 18:49:44 | Re: how to find foreign key details (column, that is) |