From: | Mario Weilguni <mweilguni(at)sime(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Setting a pre-existing index as a primary key |
Date: | 2008-04-10 09:46:55 |
Message-ID: | 47FDE20F.7040006@sime.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane schrieb:
> "Jonah H. Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>
>> I've run into a couple cases now where it would be helpful to easily
>> assign an already-existing unique index as a primary key.
>>
>
> You need to present a more convincing use-case than this unsupported
> assertion. There's hardly any effective difference between a unique
> index + NOT NULL constraints and a declared primary key ... so what
> did you really need it for?
>
>
In fact it seems to be necessary when connecting with ODBC, I had the
problem a month ago, MsSQL will not work correctly with connected tables
in a postgres database when there is no PK. NOT NULL and unique index
is not enough.
But I think it's overkill to add ALTER commands for this rare corner
case, maybe it's enough to set "indisprimary" on the index?
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Burdairon | 2008-04-10 09:47:36 | Re: Re: [HACKERS] How embarrassing: optimization of a one-shot query doesn't work |
Previous Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2008-04-10 09:33:11 | Re: Commit fest queue |