From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
Cc: | "Martin A(dot) Marques" <martin(at)math(dot)unl(dot)edu(dot)ar>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Redundant UNIQUE specs (was Re: [GENERAL] bad error message) |
Date: | 2001-02-13 00:19:20 |
Message-ID: | 24919.982023560@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
"Martin A. Marques" <martin(at)math(dot)unl(dot)edu(dot)ar> writes:
> test=# CREATE TABLE dedicacion (
> test(# id_dedi SERIAL UNIQUE,
> test(# nombre_dedi CHAR(10) UNIQUE
> test(# );
> NOTICE: CREATE TABLE will create implicit sequence 'dedicacion_id_dedi_seq'
> for SERIAL column 'dedicacion.id_dedi'
> NOTICE: CREATE TABLE/UNIQUE will create implicit index
> 'dedicacion_id_dedi_key' for table 'dedicacion'
> NOTICE: CREATE TABLE/UNIQUE will create implicit index
> 'dedicacion_id_dedi_key' for table 'dedicacion'
> NOTICE: CREATE TABLE/UNIQUE will create implicit index
> 'dedicacion_nombre_dedi_key' for table 'dedicacion'
> ERROR: Cannot create index: 'dedicacion_id_dedi_key' already exists
Hm. There is code in the parser to discard duplicate UNIQUE
specifications when a PRIMARY KEY is present. Shouldn't it just
do so in all cases, PRIMARY KEY or no?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Paul M Foster | 2001-02-13 00:35:00 | Re: PostgreSQL vs Oracle vs DB2 vs MySQL - Which should I use? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-02-12 23:36:41 | Re: performance - self-joins vs. subqueries |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Philip Warner | 2001-02-13 01:33:36 | Re: pg_dump output |
Previous Message | Philip Warner | 2001-02-12 22:56:41 | Re: pg_dump output |