Обсуждение: Re: [HACKERS] Features list
Thus spake Bruce Momjian
> > I didn't notice anything about primary keys. Not sure if you want
> > to mention it since it is incomplete but it is an enhancement over
> > 6.3. I just sent docs to Tom explaining how to utilize it as is.
>
> I don't know anything about it. Give me a one-liner.
Hmmm. How about this?
Facility (incomplete) for tracking primary keys. To be fully implemented
in the next release but see [wherever explanation goes] for information
on how to use it now.
Not a one liner though. Hmmm...
Catalogue support for primary keys.
Maybe?
Perhaps others can help. I'll copy the list on this message.
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@{druid|vex}.net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 424 2871 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
> Thus spake Bruce Momjian > > > I didn't notice anything about primary keys. Not sure if you want > > > to mention it since it is incomplete but it is an enhancement over > > > 6.3. I just sent docs to Tom explaining how to utilize it as is. > > > > I don't know anything about it. Give me a one-liner. > > Hmmm. How about this? > > Facility (incomplete) for tracking primary keys. To be fully implemented > in the next release but see [wherever explanation goes] for information > on how to use it now. > > Not a one liner though. Hmmm... > > Catalogue support for primary keys. > > Maybe? > > Perhaps others can help. I'll copy the list on this message. When someone uses PRIMARY in table creation, why don't we just plop something in the field? -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
Thus spake Bruce Momjian
> When someone uses PRIMARY in table creation, why don't we just plop
> something in the field?
Well, that would be the "completion" of the facility. Also, we should
fill in the proper values in the system catalogues. The latter is probably
easy but the former rewuires mucking with the table creation code. I don't
think it is a lot of work but perhaps not something to start now.
In any case, we're past the freeze, right?
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@{druid|vex}.net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 424 2871 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
> Thus spake Bruce Momjian > > When someone uses PRIMARY in table creation, why don't we just plop > > something in the field? > > Well, that would be the "completion" of the facility. Also, we should > fill in the proper values in the system catalogues. The latter is probably > easy but the former rewuires mucking with the table creation code. I don't > think it is a lot of work but perhaps not something to start now. > > In any case, we're past the freeze, right? I hesitate to add a mention that we have a field for primary key, while we do nothing with it. This was brought up, but post-freeze, and since it was totally new, could not be added. -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
>
> > Thus spake Bruce Momjian
> > > When someone uses PRIMARY in table creation, why don't we just plop
> > > something in the field?
> >
> > Well, that would be the "completion" of the facility. Also, we should
> > fill in the proper values in the system catalogues. The latter is probably
> > easy but the former rewuires mucking with the table creation code. I don't
> > think it is a lot of work but perhaps not something to start now.
> >
> > In any case, we're past the freeze, right?
>
> I hesitate to add a mention that we have a field for primary key, while
> we do nothing with it.
>
> This was brought up, but post-freeze, and since it was totally new,
> could not be added.
I've seen the relfkeys too and have something in mind for
FOREIGN KEY for 6.5. 6.5 will be the comeback of attribute
rules and I think that foreign key checks and the like
(including ON DELETE CASCADE) could get implemented using
rules.
Let's pick it up after 6.4 is out.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#======================================== jwieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) #
> I've seen the relfkeys too and have something in mind for > FOREIGN KEY for 6.5. 6.5 will be the comeback of attribute > rules and I think that foreign key checks and the like > (including ON DELETE CASCADE) could get implemented using > rules. > > Let's pick it up after 6.4 is out. That is a temping way to do foreign keys. Nice. -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026