Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com>, Steve Singer <ssinger(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info>, Steve Singer <ssinger_pg(at)sympatico(dot)ca>, PGSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index
Date: 2010-12-03 19:23:51
Message-ID: 1291404231.30414.0.camel@vanquo.pezone.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On sön, 2010-11-28 at 20:40 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 8:06 PM, Itagaki Takahiro
> <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 05:58, Steve Singer <ssinger(at)ca(dot)afilias(dot)info> wrote:
> >> The attached version of the patch gets your regression tests to pass.
> >> I'm going to mark this as ready for a committer.
> >
> > I think we need more discussions about the syntax:
> >  ALTER TABLE table_name ADD PRIMARY KEY (...) WITH (INDEX='index_name')
> 
> Why not:
> 
> ALTER TABLE table_name ADD PRIMARY KEY (...) INDEX index_name;

I would think that that determines that name of the index that the
command creates.  It does not convey that an existing index is to be
used.


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-12-03 19:43:18
Subject: Re: Patch to add a primary key using an existing index
Previous:From: Jeff DavisDate: 2010-12-03 18:27:04
Subject: Re: should we set hint bits without dirtying the page?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group