From: | Jonathan Tapicer <tapicer(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Multiple foreign keys with the same name and information_schema |
Date: | 2009-08-10 15:25:22 |
Message-ID: | 4603e2db0908100825v659d1c23o2ec3336ec5770eeb@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
>
> Actually, the information_schema supposes that constraint names are
> unique within a *schema*, not within a *catalog* (a/k/a database).
> Don't know if that distinction can help you or not. You are correct
> that Postgres is less rigid. We do not consider that to be a deficiency
> on the Postgres side ;-)
Yes, my bad. Anyway, it doesn't help, I have both tables on the same schema.
>
> If you want to use the information_schema to deal with this stuff, the
> answer is to make sure that your application follows the SQL-standard
> rule of not duplicating constraint names within a schema.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
Yes, I know that following the SQL standards is the way to go, but
sometimes this has to be done in databases I don't design, so I have
to be prepared for every case. I think I'll use the pg_catalog for
this case.
Thank you for you answer,
Jonathan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rodrick Hales | 2009-08-10 16:31:34 | NOTICE: there is no transaction in progress |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-08-10 15:07:54 | Re: Multiple foreign keys with the same name and information_schema |