From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Naming of new EXCLUDE constraints |
Date: | 2010-04-13 02:56:23 |
Message-ID: | p2r603c8f071004121956z14341cc8r52a0cf23888cfbc2@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 9:28 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On Sun, 2010-04-04 at 22:12 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> > Simon Riggs wrote:
>> > >
>> > > How about we call it "exclusivity constraints".
>> > >
>> > > Not much of a change, but helps to differentiate.
>> >
>> > Well, the keyword is EXCLUDE so we could call it "EXCLUDE contraints".
>>
>> If that is the keyword then that is what people will use, agreed.
>>
>> That is poor English, but I think we can reword the sentences to allow
>> that phrase to make sense.
>>
>> e.g. Added capability for EXCLUDE constraints.
>
> I have modified the documentation with the attached patch to call this
> new features "exclude constraints". Is this what everyone wants?
I don't think we should be changing this without input from a lot more
people. We had a very, very long dicussion of this when this was
initially under development. Changing it now seems like a good way to
reopen a can of worms.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-04-13 03:03:16 | Re: Naming of new EXCLUDE constraints |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-04-13 01:28:51 | Naming of new EXCLUDE constraints |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-04-13 03:03:16 | Re: Naming of new EXCLUDE constraints |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-04-13 01:32:53 | Re: testing hot standby |