bug in schema export?
bug in schema export?
От:
Jonathan Vanasco <postgres@2xlp.com>
Дата:
i believe i found a bug psql> create table test_failure ( id integer primary key ); psql> alter table test_failure alter id rename to id_new ; # not relevant, just illustrating the reason how i got to step 2 psql> alter table test_failure_pkey rename to test_failure_id_new_pkey; $ pg_dump --schema-only -ttest_failure -Utest > test.sql the pkey in the schema is added as 'test_failure_pkey' , not 'test_failure_id_new_pkey'; it happens whether or not you use 'alter table' or 'alter index' on the pkey name
Re: bug in schema export?
От:
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Дата:
Jonathan Vanasco writes: > i believe i found a bug > psql> create table test_failure ( id integer primary key ); > psql> alter table test_failure alter id rename to id_new ; # not > relevant, just illustrating the reason how i got to step 2 > psql> alter table test_failure_pkey rename to test_failure_id_new_pkey; > $ pg_dump --schema-only -ttest_failure -Utest > test.sql > the pkey in the schema is added as 'test_failure_pkey' , not > 'test_failure_id_new_pkey'; You didn't rename the constraint. If we were going to do anything about this, it'd be to forbid directly renaming indexes that're owned by constraints. However, since we don't currently have a RENAME CONSTRAINT command, the effect of that would be that you couldn't do it at all ... In the meantime you can probably do an UPDATE on pg_constraint if you really care. regards, tom lane
Re: bug in schema export?
От:
Jonathan Vanasco <postgres@2xlp.com>
Дата:
On Apr 17, 2007, at 2:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Jonathan Vanasco writes: >> i believe i found a bug >> psql> create table test_failure ( id integer primary key ); >> psql> alter table test_failure alter id rename to id_new ; # not >> relevant, just illustrating the reason how i got to step 2 >> psql> alter table test_failure_pkey rename to >> test_failure_id_new_pkey; > >> $ pg_dump --schema-only -ttest_failure -Utest > test.sql > >> the pkey in the schema is added as 'test_failure_pkey' , not >> 'test_failure_id_new_pkey'; > > You didn't rename the constraint. If we were going to do anything > about > this, it'd be to forbid directly renaming indexes that're owned by > constraints. However, since we don't currently have a RENAME > CONSTRAINT > command, the effect of that would be that you couldn't do it at > all ... > > In the meantime you can probably do an UPDATE on pg_constraint if you > really care. Extremely annoying. In the example above, \d test_failure will not show a separate constraint named by the old value. it only shows the current name of the index. Either renaming primary keys should be disabled, or that constraint forced to be visible. Under the current system, there is no intuitive way for someone to be aware of an old constraint on a renamed index like this. I discovered this while trying to re-merge 2 databases that were split onto a new bigger cluster and having them complain about conflicting constraints. // Jonathan Vanasco | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - | SyndiClick.com | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - | FindMeOn.com - The cure for Multiple Web Personality Disorder | Web Identity Management and 3D Social Networking | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - | RoadSound.com - Tools For Bands, Stuff For Fans | Collaborative Online Management And Syndication Tools | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -