From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | PGSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index |
Date: | 2010-12-03 21:41:44 |
Message-ID: | 4CF96418.1050700@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/3/10 12:27 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 2:56 PM, r t <pgsql(at)xzilla(dot)net> wrote:
>> What exactly was the objection to the following -->
>> ALTER TABLE table_name ADD PRIMARY KEY (column_list) USING index_name;
>> Is the objection that you might have been trying to specify a constraint
>> named "using" ? I'm willing to make that option more difficult. :-)
>
> I think it's that someone might expect the word after USING to be the
> name of an index AM.
Seems unlikely to cause confusion to me.
However, I don't see why we need (column_list). Surely the index has a
column list already?
ALTER TABLE table_name ADD CONSTRAINT pk_name PRIMARY KEY USING index_name
... seems like the syntax most consistent with the existing commands.
Anything else would be confusingly inconsistent with the way you add a
brand-new PK.
--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2010-12-03 21:53:57 | ERROR: could not identify an equality operator for type box |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-12-03 20:27:57 | Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index |