Re: Scope of constraint names
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Scope of constraint names |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.44.0207072313440.930-100000@localhost.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Scope of constraint names (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Scope of constraint names
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane writes: > A considerable advantage of per-relation constraint names is that a new > unique name can be assigned for a nameless constraint while holding only > a lock on the target relation. We'd need a global lock to create unique > constraint names in the SQL92 semantics. Presumably, the field pg_class.relchecks already keeps a count of the number of constraints, so it should be possible to assign numbers easily. > The only way I can see around that would be to use newoid(), or perhaps > a dedicated sequence generator, to construct constraint names. The > resulting unpredictable constraint names would be horribly messy to deal > with in the regression tests, so I'm not eager to do this. Or we simply assign constraint names explicitly in the regression tests. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: