Outdated note about unique indexes

From: Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Outdated note about unique indexes
Date: 2015-07-08 21:56:09
Message-ID: CAK3UJRE4wGWMjGOfUZcTAOn_k43ETi-jh6FsLF7XX3=Qmkdt3A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

Hi,

I noticed that the note on a page about unique indexes

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/indexes-unique.html

says "The preferred way to add a unique constraint to a table is ALTER
TABLE ... ADD CONSTRAINT. The use of indexes to enforce unique constraints
could be considered an implementation detail that should not be accessed
directly... ".

That note has been there forever, in particular since before we supported
CONCURRENTLY, which is pretty darn important in many uses nowadays. Since
it seems like some users have taken this suggestion seriously, e.g. on
stackoverflow[1], how about we remove this outdated suggestion? There is
already a previous mention a few sections earlier[2] suggesting the use of
CONCURRENTLY, so I don't think we really need to reiterate that suggestion
here.

Josh

[1]
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/23542794/postgres-unique-constraint-vs-index
[2] http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/interactive/indexes-intro.html

Attachment Content-Type Size
indices_constraint_suggestion.diff text/plain 769 bytes

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2015-07-08 22:10:46 Re: Outdated note about unique indexes
Previous Message Monica Gamazo 2015-06-30 00:11:26 Re: Omission of "(or C)" in psql's "pset title" header