From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Melvin Davidson <melvin6925(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org >> PG-General Mailing List" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Restore relhaspkey in PostgreSQL Version 11 Beta |
Date: | 2018-07-30 23:24:48 |
Message-ID: | 20180730232448.3pfx3slkpzua33da@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hi,
On 2018-07-30 19:11:34 -0400, Melvin Davidson wrote:
> *Of course. Would you be so kind as to point out where in the
> information_schema it *
> *indicates if a table has a primary key or not. Oh wait, now I
> remember...no place.*
As Adrian pointed out, that's wrong. It's in information_schema. You're
pretty damn antagonistic while asking for things.
> *>Keeping random atavistic things around, would slow us down, which will be
> a>price everybody is paying. *
> *Random atavistic things? I hardly think relhaspkey is random. It's been
> there since version 7.2.*
> *Exactly how does keeping it around slow you/us down?*
Being old doesn't imply it's not superfluous and/or slows us
down. There've been a number of discussions and bug reports about the
inaccuracy - even though it's documented! - it in the last few
years. That alone costs time. Additionally it's code we need to
maintain.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Adrian Klaver | 2018-07-30 23:25:08 | Re: Design of a database table |
Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2018-07-30 23:13:59 | Re: Restore relhaspkey in PostgreSQL Version 11 Beta |