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 15:47:01 |
Message-ID: | 4880BAF5.2080208@bluegap.ch |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
sorry, some strange key-combination made my mail client send too early...
I myself wrote:
> 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
.. as the pointer to the index to use for replication.
Offering the user a possibility to choose another (index + not null)
would require something like ALTER TABLE ... ADD REPLICATION KEY ... or
some such. Mostly syntactic sugar, which can be added as soon as we
really need it.
> While I'm normally an absolute fan of generality,
>
> I think you didn't quite get the point.
Iiik.. that's what I didn't want to send and wanted to delete before
sending... :-) Sorry.
Regards
Markus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Markus Wanner | 2008-07-18 15:48:29 | Re: Postgres-R: primary key patches |
Previous Message | Markus Wanner | 2008-07-18 15:41:23 | Re: Postgres-R: primary key patches |