| From: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | chris <cbbrowne(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Postgres-R: primary key patches |
| Date: | 2008-07-18 15:41:23 |
| Message-ID: | 4880B9A3.7060400@bluegap.ch |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
David Fetter wrote:
> While I'm a "chicken" rather than a "pig" on this project
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chicken_and_the_Pig>, I believe that
> covering the more general case right from the start would be a much
> better plan.
I was trying to say that Postgres-R internally relies only on a unique
index with not null constraint. It doesn't care if you name it PRIMARY
KEY or REPLICATION KEY or whatever.
So, it's just a question of the syntax. We already have PRIMARY KEYs,
and those are pretty much what I think is needed in 99% of all cases as
the pointer to the replication
While I'm normally an absolute fan of generality,
I think you didn't quite get the point.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Markus Wanner | 2008-07-18 15:47:01 | Re: Postgres-R: primary key patches |
| Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-07-18 15:15:13 | Re: Postgres-R: primary key patches |