Re: Naming of new EXCLUDE constraints

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Naming of new EXCLUDE constraints
Date: 2010-04-13 06:15:25
Message-ID: 26516.1271139325@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>> Fine, then we will just have to live with "exclusion constraints" and
>> "contraint exclusion".

> I am not necessarily 100% averse to changing it... just saying that it
> shouldn't be done unless we have a clear consensus to overrule the
> previous consensus.

Well, I'm completely unimpressed with the proposed text, which includes
phrases like "uniqueness and exclude constraints". That leaves nothing
but the impression that these people don't speak the English too good.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2010-04-13 08:16:09 pgsql: Only try to do a graceful disconnect if we've successfully loaded
Previous Message User Bschwarz 2010-04-13 03:36:50 pgtcl - libpgtcl: * Changed direct struct access to errorLine to the Tcl

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-04-13 07:09:01 Re: debugger question
Previous Message Jaime Casanova 2010-04-13 06:12:45 Re: testing hot standby