patch: Distinguish between unique indexes and unique constraints
in [PgSql]
|
Prev: [HACKERS] [PATCH] fix segfault with DO and plperl/plperlu
Next: [PATCH] fix segfault with DO and plperl/plperlu
From: Robert Haas on 18 Apr 2010 11:18 On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 11:53 PM, Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Addressing TODO item "Distinguish between unique indexes and unique > constraints in \d+" for psql, and picking up from thread: > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/8780.1271187360(a)sss.pgh.pa.us > > Attached is a simple patch which clarifies unique constraints with > "UNIQUE CONSTRAINT" in psql's \d+ description of a table. The > appearance of unique indexes is left as-is. > > == Old \d+ display == > Indexes: > "name_uniq_constr" UNIQUE, btree (name) > > == New \d+ display == > Indexes: > "name_uniq_constr" UNIQUE CONSTRAINT, btree (name) You know, I've never really understood the difference between these two types of things, or why we need to support both. Which may be just because I'm slow? ....Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Tom Lane on 18 Apr 2010 11:23 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(a)gmail.com> writes: > You know, I've never really understood the difference between these > two types of things, or why we need to support both. Which may be > just because I'm slow? Unique constraints are defined by the SQL standard, and have a syntax that can't support a lot of the extensions that CREATE INDEX allows. There's also restrictions in the information_schema views. So unifying the two concepts completely would be a mess. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Robert Haas on 18 Apr 2010 11:41 On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 11:23 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(a)sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas(a)gmail.com> writes: >> You know, I've never really understood the difference between these >> two types of things, or why we need to support both. Which may be >> just because I'm slow? > > Unique constraints are defined by the SQL standard, and have a syntax > that can't support a lot of the extensions that CREATE INDEX allows. > There's also restrictions in the information_schema views. > So unifying the two concepts completely would be a mess. I thought it might be something like that. Josh - you may want to add your patch here: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/commitfest_view/open ....Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Josh Kupershmidt on 18 Apr 2010 11:53
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Josh - you may want to add your patch here: > > https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/commitfest_view/open Added, thanks! Josh -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers |