Re: constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: "Clark C(dot) Evans" <cce(at)clarkevans(dot)com>
Subject: Re: constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance
Date: 2006-02-25 00:23:19
Message-ID: 200602241623.20285.josh@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Clark,

> So it would seem that naming rules for constraints in PostgreSQL
> isn't exactly compliant with SQL92. I'm curious what sorts of
> constraints are enforced...

Correct. Our uniqueness on constraints is:
schema_name | table_name | constraint_name

We're aware that it's a violation of SQL92, but there's no way for us to
change it now without making it very hard for people to upgrade. And,
frankly, aside from the very occasional information_schema complaint,
nobody seems to care.

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Clark C. Evans 2006-02-25 00:40:33 Re: constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance
Previous Message Clark C. Evans 2006-02-25 00:03:43 constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance