Isn't a PK a CONSTRAINT and not an INDEX???
Some say "one or more fields" and others "one or more attributes" that
uniquely identifies a record in a table and PG like many other databases
would create a default internal index on that CONSTRAINT that can't be
seen or dropped unless you will drop the Pkey.
In that case the two separate pg_class relhasindex and relhaspkey would
make sense indeed - just a thought nothing else and we'll take it as is.
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 12:33 PM
To: Lawrence Cohan
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #4238: pg_class.relhasindex not updated by
"Lawrence Cohan" <lawrencec(at)1shoppingcart(dot)com> writes:
> Is it possible that because of the PKEY's we have on the tables that
> flag is still showing "true"?
Uh, well certainly -- a PK is an index.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2008-06-13 16:56:45|
|Subject: Re: BUG #4238: pg_class.relhasindex not updated by vacuum|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2008-06-13 16:32:38|
|Subject: Re: BUG #4238: pg_class.relhasindex not updated by vacuum |