Re: issue about information_schema REFERENTIAL_CONSTRAINTS

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Fabien COELHO" <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "PostgreSQL Bugs List" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: issue about information_schema REFERENTIAL_CONSTRAINTS
Date: 2010-09-03 15:14:35
Message-ID: 4C80CA8B020000250003517B@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-docs

Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Yeah, exactly. I think that the current tradeoff is just fine.
> If you want SQL-standard behavior, pick SQL-standard constraint
> names, and there you are.

I see that as the crux if it -- the current implementation *allows*
standard-conforming behavior, even though it doesn't *enforce*
conforming naming. The proposed alternative does not allow
standard-conforming behavior. If you're going to use something
which is PostgreSQL-specific, you may as well write your own views
or use the "native" tables and views directly.

-Kevin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabien COELHO 2010-09-03 17:39:19 Re: issue about information_schema REFERENTIAL_CONSTRAINTS
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-09-03 14:58:25 Re: issue about information_schema REFERENTIAL_CONSTRAINTS

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabien COELHO 2010-09-03 17:39:19 Re: issue about information_schema REFERENTIAL_CONSTRAINTS
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-09-03 14:58:25 Re: issue about information_schema REFERENTIAL_CONSTRAINTS