From: | Martín Marqués <martin(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Eugene Wang <eugenewangfw(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, PG Doc comments form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Mistakes between an example and its description |
Date: | 2018-05-10 19:16:43 |
Message-ID: | CAPdiE1zARLreHEowYuG8Gk5-Eph-tq1v09SomLofr1FGNQ0c6A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
2018-05-10 16:04 GMT-03:00 Eugene Wang <eugenewangfw(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> Unique Constraint and Unique Index should be the same in this single-column
> case, right?
The unique index is what enforces the uniqueness of the field with a
UNIQUE constraint, but a unique index is not necessarily a constraint.
For example, you can use a unique index to create a primary key
constraint with the USING clause, but you can't use the UNIQUE index
created by a UNIQUE CONSTRAINT for this action.
> Because, according to CONSTRAINT page in Postgres Documentation, Unique
> Constraint on single column is realized as Unique B-TREE index.
>
> I have just realized that it is still a btree index, but I think this
> example is not exactly a regular btree example. At least I will put the
> example as: CREATE INDEX title_idx ON films USING BTREE(title);
Yes, I agree on dropping the UNIQUE, just like Alvaro. There's another
example which creates a UNIQUE index later in the doc, and not the
best choice for a first example.
Regards,
--
Martín Marqués http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2018-05-10 19:39:16 | Re: Mistakes between an example and its description |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-05-10 19:09:54 | Re: Mistakes between an example and its description |