| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-sql(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Uniqueness of rule, constraint, and trigger names |
| Date: | 2002-03-04 22:18:32 |
| Message-ID: | 8491.1015280312@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 4 Mar 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
>> For constraints, we'd need to change the code to be more careful to
>> generate unique names for unnamed constraints. That doesn't seem
> Another question would be what to do with inherited constraints that
> conflict in multiple inheritance cases. It'd probably be safe to rename
> those on the child table to be unique,
I'd just raise an error, I think, unless perhaps the constraints are
identical (for some definition of identical). We don't allow
conflicting column definitions to be inherited, so why constraints?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2002-03-04 22:51:16 | Re: Uniqueness of rule, constraint, and trigger names |
| Previous Message | Stephan Szabo | 2002-03-04 22:13:18 | Re: Uniqueness of rule, constraint, and trigger names |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2002-03-04 22:51:16 | Re: Uniqueness of rule, constraint, and trigger names |
| Previous Message | Stephan Szabo | 2002-03-04 22:13:18 | Re: Uniqueness of rule, constraint, and trigger names |