* Bruce Momjian (pgman@candle.pha.pa.us) wrote:
> Added to TODO:
>=20
> o Have ALTER INDEX update the name of a constraint using that ind=
ex
> o Allow ALTER TABLE RENAME CONSTRAINT
More like:
Add ALTER TABLE RENAME CONSTRAINT; implicitly rename linked indexes also
Is there much dependency on constraint names? If not, it'd seem like
implementing this would be pretty straight-forward. For some reason, I
thought there was some dependency on constraint names, but I can't
remember what...
Thanks,
Stephen
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
--
>=20
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> > > * Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> > >> Arguably we should forbid ALTER INDEX RENAME on an index that belong=
s to
> > >> a constraint, and make you rename the constraint instead (and have t=
hat
> > >> implicitly change the index name too).
> >=20
> > > That would work too, though I don't think you can just rename a
> > > constraint.
> >=20
> > Yeah, we'd need to add syntax for that, but it seems useful anyway.
> >=20
> > Plan B would be to make the ALTER INDEX RENAME update the associated
> > constraint too, but that doesn't give you a facility to rename
> > constraints of other types.
> >=20
> > Anyway, point is that I think we should force the index and constraint
> > names to track each other, rather than complicating matters by
> > supporting the situation where they are different.
> >=20
> > regards, tom lane
> >=20
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
> > choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
> > match
> >=20
>=20
> --=20
> Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
> + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19=
073