| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | Bret Hughes <bhughes(at)elevating(dot)com>, Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>, postgresql sql list <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: trigger/for key help |
| Date: | 2004-04-13 13:25:04 |
| Message-ID: | 21878.1081862704@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-sql |
Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> Is there a reason postgres goes out of its way to pick names that
> will be harder to work with than necessary?
If we use ordinary identifiers for system-generated names then we will
be infringing on user name space --- ie, there's a potential for
conflict. I suppose we could use long randomly-generated names like
ewjncm343cnlen, but are those really easier to work with?
I think a more useful approach is to treat it as a documentation
problem. Perhaps an example in the ALTER TABLE man page would help.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Terry Brick | 2004-04-13 16:13:05 | Formatting Functions and Group By |
| Previous Message | Laura Scott | 2004-04-13 12:49:39 | relation X does not exist |